Malema’s ‘defend movement from rubbish’ a cold shoulder to MP Chirwa after apology letter debate

“The letter's inappropriate insinuations have forced our movement into a defensive stance, detracting our members from the immediate task of doing door-to-door [campaigning] because they must now defend their movement from rubbish.” 

So said EFF leader Julius Malema after MP Naledi Chirwa's public apology for not attending the budget speech in parliament last month because her baby fell ill came under the spotlight.

Chirwa, who has been an MP since 2019, was among several MPs instructed to publicly apologise for not attending the budget speech and impeachment vote of Western Cape judge president John Hlophe on February 21.   

She failed to report her absence to the EFF chief whip and instead reported to the party. This was seen as not following the correct reporting procedure and Chirwa was instructed to buy two EFF-branded gazebos, costing R10,000, as a fine for her absence. 

Chirwa, in her apology, detailed sacrifices she had made for her political work because she believed she did not abscond without substantial reasons.

“I do not doubt my commitment to the movement of the people and the responsibility we have been entrusted with in parliament. This is the primary reason I went on maternity leave a day before I gave birth and returned two months before the lapse of my maternity leave,” she said. 

While some people applauded the party for ensuring “accountability”, others deemed the sanctions against Chirwa “extreme” and not aligned with principals of pan-Africanism. 

Malema was not happy with the letter. Though he did not name Chirwa, Malema took to social media platforms on Wednesday, saying party members had to defend the EFF because they were questioned about the letter during door-to-door campaigns this week 

“The letter’s inappropriate insinuations have forced our movement into a defensive stance, detracting our members from the immediate task of doing door-to-door because they must now defend their movement from rubbish. In situations where we must choose between an individual and the organisation we must always prioritise the organisation,” he said.

Joining the debate, political analyst Ongama Mtika said the letter debacle might not end well as some people believed Chirwa could lose her job or not make it back to parliament after the 2024 elections.

“Foolish move loading. Resurrecting a dying matter by giving it an explosive twist,” Mtika said reacting to Malema’s post. 

“I had successfully stayed out of the letter debate as I was grappling with the free will of an organisation to rightfully demand organisational discipline in general vs the specific circumstances of a mother. But now that Juju’s signalling salvo has landed, akuthuleki [I cannot be quiet].”

Political commentator Tessa Dooms said Chirwa’s dilemma was a phenomenon women all over the world were grappling with. In an interview with Newzroom Afrika, Dooms said the question of women's care work and how it affects other forms of work was not considered in workplaces.

“Naledi was trying to signal to the public certain things about how she felt she was treated without saying so. It was politically her putting out a signal that she did not feel all of her circumstances were taken into account. She was not direct about that but that was the implication. She wanted to be heard politically, that she was not just absconding from work, she believed she had fair reasons. The public has heard her,” she said.

Here's how people reacted to the debate on social media:

TimesLIVE