Story audio is generated using AI
National Assembly speaker Thoko Didiza has come under fire over her decision not to oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa’s court bid to interdict parliamentary impeachment proceedings against him.
The matter was the subject of intense discussion during the first official meeting of the National Assembly’s section 89 impeachment committee against Ramaphosa, stemming from the theft of huge amounts of American dollars at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala game farm in 2020.
Parties represented in the impeachment committee also rejected a proposal from parliament’s lawyers that Ramaphosa may elect not to appear before the impeachment committee but rather send his lawyers.
The committee met on Wednesday to discuss the terms of reference to guide the proceedings.
The committee also threw out a position by the United Africans Transformation party and MK Party that senior lawyers due to be appointed as evidence leaders should be subjected to vetting, with the EFF, among others, arguing that no senior advocate would be willing to subject themselves to such a process, as they were already fit and proper.
Didiza stunned political parties at the weekend when she opted not to oppose Ramaphosa’s interdict against parliament on Phala Phala, only filing a notice to comply with the court outcome on the matter.
The decision has been slammed by parties such as the DA, the EFF and the MKP, who accused Dididza of showing bias in favour of Ramaphosa. They alleged that she acted against the legal advice she had received from parliament’s internal and external lawyers.
EFF leader Julius Malema said: “The speaker acted wrongly by not opposing. The president is challenging parliament. The speaker’s advice was only one option: oppose.
“There were not two options. The speaker could not rely on the legal advice of our committee. The legal advice told her what she did not want to hear. So as a committee, we need to take a very strong view that we are disappointed by what the speaker did because her duty is to protect parliament. She just abandoned her responsibility, which is to defend parliament.”
The MKP’s parliamentary leader, former Western Cape High Court judge president John Hlophe, also weighed in: “It is very clear to me that the speaker totally misconstrued her role in the matter,” said Hlophe.
“We need to make decisions as this committee as to what exactly to do in the light of the speaker totally misconstruing her role.
“If anything, the advice that was given to her was that she must oppose the president’s application. She chose to ignore that. Her duty is to uphold the constitution and protect it. She has failed dismally. So, we need to agree on what we are going to do.”
In the end, committee chair Makashule Gana reminded MPs that he would be opposing Ramaphosa’s interdict against parliament, and other parties such as the ATM and the EFF were already doing so.
The ANC, for its part, announced on Wednesday that it was withdrawing as an intervening party in the legal fight between parliament and Ramaphosa.
Parties have until July 10 to finalise the impeachment committee’s terms of reference.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.