Former president Thabo Mbeki — in a black ANC jacket — insisted his vote was his secret in the 2016 local government elections. President Cyril Ramaphosa in that same year, then ANC deputy president, joked with journalists his vote was no secret. The Independent Electoral Commission has prided itself over the years on assuring voters their preference is their secret, a phrase often repeated by South Africans in jest when asked who they voted for. The principle behind keeping a voter’s identity anonymous in an election or referendum is sound, mainly because it helps prevent voter intimidation. But the soundness of the argument depends on the context.
National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula on Monday rejected a request by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to have a parliamentary vote on the Phala Phala report take place in secret. ATM leader Vuyo Zungula argued that “a secret ballot is a tool to safeguard the responsibility of National Assembly members to vote according to their own conscience”. Basically, Zungula is arguing that a secret ballot will allow MPs to make individual decisions on how to vote instead of toeing the party line.
Mapisa-Nqakula had a different argument that in this context makes perfect sense: “A closed voting procedure will deprive the citizens of identifying the positions of their representatives across party lines, and this may facilitate the possibility of corruption aimed at influencing members to vote in a manner where they will be shielded from accountability to the people they represent for the exercise of their constitutional duty,” she said.
Let’s see if they will raise their hands where it matters most. If they are for the constitution and not the individual, let tomorrow show if they are going to vote with their conscience or their party mandate.
— EFF leader Julius Malema
The vote on the Phala Phala report, compiled by an independent panel of three legal experts, including former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, can change the course of history. The panel found Ramaphosa may have broken several laws when he received and kept at least $580,000 (R10.139m) in cash on his game farm. On Tuesday, parliament is set to vote on whether an impeachment hearing should proceed. In the interests of transparency and accountability, South Africans have the right to know how each MP voted. In this case, it is in the public interest to have an open ballot.
The ANC at the end of Monday said it would vote against the adoption of the report. With 230 MPs in the house, compared with the 170 seats that go to opposition parties, the ruling party may just manage to put an end to the sorry saga on Tuesday if all their MPs are present. That is assuming all ANC MPs will follow the instruction from the party’s highest decision-making body — the national executive committee — to support Ramaphosa. Only an open vote will tell us that.
EFF leader Julius Malema welcomed Mapisa-Nqakula’s decision, using it as an opportunity to call out those who have campaigned against Ramaphosa. “As the EFF we are very happy that the secret ballot was not granted. Nkosazana [Dlamini-Zuma] spoke on TV and said Cyril must go, Lindiwe Sisulu also spoke and said he must go, Supra [Mahumapelo] as well. Let’s see if they will raise their hands where it matters most. If they are for the constitution and not the individual, let tomorrow show if they are going to vote with their conscience or their party mandate.”
The ANC caucus has almost always voted in a block. Mapisa-Nqakula’s decision will probably allow that tradition to continue. Yet there is still the possibility it all gets delayed. Ramaphosa is taking the report on judicial review, which may delay the proceedings in the National Assembly. Either way, the principle of transparency remains.
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.