ANC MPs take action against Pemmy Majodina
A group of ANC MPs are launching a three-pronged action against their parliamentary boss Pemmy Majodina over the personal protective equipment (PPE) deal the ANC caucus awarded to her son.
TimesLIVE can reveal the plan includes laying a criminal charge with the police, reporting Majodina to the public protector and to parliament’s ethics committee for investigation.
On Friday morning ANC MP Lawrence McDonald said he was on his way to the central police station in Cape Town, where he would open a case of fraud and corruption in terms of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act and as per section 217 of the constitution, which McDonald claims was contravened in the transaction.
The section deals with procurement and prescribes that a fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective system should be followed during procurement.
“As ANC members, we must not shy away from taking people to task, especially people in leadership positions,” said McDonald.
“Our president has given clear instructions, and even said he would take his own son to the police if he has committed a crime.
“It’s clear marching orders that we must not shy away from reporting crime and corruption to the police,” he said.
The MPs involved in the action against Majodina are known supporters of beleaguered ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule, but they insist the steps they are taking are not factional and they are doing so in the interest of justice.
McDonald also rejected the suggestion his actions were factional, and denied belonging to a faction.
ANC MP Mervyn Dirks was expected to lead a handful of his comrades to a meeting with public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane in Johannesburg to lodge a complaint for her office to investigate the transaction.
It is truly regrettable that we have reached a point in history where we have to lay a complaint against our own chief whip with the public protector.ANC MP Mervyn Dirks
“It is truly regrettable that we have reached a point in history where we have to lay a complaint against our own chief whip with the public protector,” he said on Thursday,
“It was not easy an easy decision, but we realised that we as legislators cannot claim to be fighting against corruption, malfeasance and unethical behaviour when we cannot hold our own accountable.
“Our decision to lay a complaint against the chief whip was not taken lightly, but we came to the realisation that it is the work of our generation to set a greater moral and ethical standard for those who are about to succeed us,” said Dirks.
Dirks said their actions were a notice to all that the executive, judiciary and MPs should be held accountable like everybody else.
An MP who is part of the group, but did not want to be named, said inaction by the ANC’s top leadership had forced their hand.
“What has the ANC done about this matter since the story came out?
“We are forced to take these steps because the ANC has not even issued a statement on the matter,” said the MP.
It emerged last week that a company in which Majodina’s son, Mkhonto weSizwe Majodina, is a sole director supplied the ANC’s national caucus with 150 thermometers valued at R350 each to be used in the party’s constituency offices across SA.
The company invoiced the “ANC national caucus” for R52,500 on January 15 for supplying the instruments to measure body temperature.
Majodina is the political head of the ANC caucus.
Speaking through her spokesperson, Nomfanelo Kota, Majodina defended the transaction, saying the caucus did not have to go to open tender as the amount was less than R100,000. This is in terms of the ANC parliamentary caucus’s financial policy, she said.
However, two insiders said this was a lie. The caucus had previously sought three quotations when procuring goods or services way below R100,000.
Majodina later expressed regret for the deal, saying she had written to the ANC integrity commission to express her wish and willingness to voluntarily appear before the commission.
She said she would subject herself to a parliamentary ethics investigation if and when called upon to do so to clear perceptions of flouting regulations.