Q&A with Richard Mdakane on impeachment rules
The constitutional court has instructed parliament to draw up impeachment rules. Chris Barron asked national assembly rules review subcommittee chairman Richard Mdakane . . .
How long will it take?
Longer than expected. We started in 2015 and didn’t finalise because the consultation process took longer, there was some confusion.
Didn’t the court instruct you to do it without delay?
Everyone at the meeting [this week] agreed that we have to try our best to finalise it around March, April.
How do you feel about being ordered to do your job?
The court has given its judgment and we are doing what the court said we must do.
Do you agree with its judgment?
We said we are going to comply fully with the judgment. That’s what parliament has said and I agree fully with parliament. Parliament says it agrees with the minority judgment that this is judicial overreach.
Do you agree?
My view is that what counts most is the majority decision.
So why did parliament issue a statement saying it agreed with the minority judgment?
I’m not a spokesperson for parliament.
Is it judicial overreach?
I don’t really have a firm view on the matter. I’m interested in the decision of the court. We are trying to implement that decision.
Do you believe that in a constitutional democracy if parliament refuses to carry out its constitutional obligations the Constitutional Court must order it to?
In my view we must implement the constitution of the country.
So why hasn’t it been done?
We are working on the rules now.
Can the same people who have been protecting president Jacob Zuma be trusted to devise rules for his impeachment?
MPs represent the aspirations of South Africa. Whatever they do is for the benefit of society as a whole. That is what we are trying to do in this committee. There have been proposals. We have reworked them. [This week] we will circulate them to every party.
What about fears that you will use your majority to devise rules that absolve President Zuma?
What informs us is that we are drafting rules for many parliaments to come. We are not drafting rules informed by the current situation.
Could you use your majority to ensure the rules don’t apply to the current situation?
There is no majority or minority in the subcommittee, and it doesn’t take a final decision. It makes a recommendation to the rules committee.
Where the majority will decide?
The rules committee of course is proportional. But on many occasions it has not taken decisions based on partisanship.
How will you decide what is or is not a serious violation of the constitution?
That is going to be the most difficult issue. Because it’s a value judgment. What can be serious on your side may not be serious on my side. We will have to consult lawyers.
But ultimately it’s your decision?
Yes, it’s a decision we have to make. But we need the wisdom of other people to say: How do you define a serious violation?’..
There’s never been a more important time to support independent media.
From World War 1 to present-day cosmopolitan South Africa and beyond, the Sunday Times has been a pillar in covering the stories that matter to you.
For just R80 you can become a premium member (digital access) and support a publication that has played an important political and social role in South Africa for over a century of Sundays. You can cancel anytime.
Already subscribed? Sign in below.
Questions or problems? Email helpdesk@timeslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00.