DA is guilty of a staggering act of hypocrisy

The decision by the DA to deny our journalists access to cover the disciplinary hearing of its former leader, Western Cape Premier Helen Zille, is breathtaking in its hypocrisy.

In his thundering alternative state of the nation speech earlier this year, DA leader Mmusi Maimane attacked the injustice in our society and promised that "ours will be an honest, capable state" with transparency and accountability at its core.

These are not themes occasionally raised by the DA. They underpin its entire policy platform and, of course, one of the most basic principles of justice is that it must be seen to be done.

This argument has been used successfully by the media to gain access, for example, to the disciplinary hearings of Public Works officials charged in connection with the scandal of Nkandla.

Why is the official opposition so coy about media access to Zille's disciplinary hearing?

The DA argues that it is not a state entity, but it is unarguably a public organisation the conduct of whose affairs are of overwhelming public interest to those who vote, and who might vote, for the party.

Zille has raised no objection to our presence at her hearing but the party cites the potential that "the DA's political strategy, the DA's political position and the effect of Ms Zille's conduct in this regard" might be examined.

"It would patently be prejudicial for this to be made public," it says.

Our view is that the contrary applies - and that this is precisely why media access to this hearing is in the public interest.

Allowing journalists to cover Zille's hearing was an opportunity for the DA to show that it is fundamentally different to those whom it criticises. It has squandered that chance by deciding that its principles are good for the goose but not for the gander.