Parliament to oppose EFF, ATM court bid against Phala Phala secret ballot vote

Parliament has confirmed that it will oppose to the court challenge which seeks to overturn the National Assembly’s decision not to adopt the Phala Phala report.

Challenge

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and African Transformation Movement (ATM) have approached the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) and Western Cape High Court respectively, challenging National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula’s decision not to have the 13 December’s vote against the adoption of the Section 89’s report on Phala Phala by secret ballot.

Both parties have asked the courts to set aside Mapisa-Nqakula’s decision.

They also want the National Assembly’s vote declared unconstitutional and invalid and for a declaratory order that such a vote must be by secret ballot.

ALSO READ: EFF challenges Parliament’s open vote on Phala Phala, seeks to join Ramaphosa’s litigation

Parliament has since responded to the papers served to the state attorneys.

Mapisa-Nqakula informed the National Assembly’s Programming Committee during a meeting on Thursday, that they would oppose the parties’ applications.

“Yes, we have responded… we have filed papers. We have a senior counsel which will challenge the submissions made by honourable members who are challenging my ruling for a secret voting process. We are challenging that I want to say this,” she told MPs.

Review application

Regarding President Cyril Ramaphosa’s review case, Mapisa-Nqakula said Parliament would not oppose the application.

“We have information about the contents of the president’s submissions to the courts. We have decided that we will wait for the courts to deal with the matter and we will abide with the decision of the courts.”

Ramaphosa is challenging the Phala Phala report which found that the president had a case to answer in relation to the February 2020 burglary at his game farm.

READ MORE: Ramaphosa’s ConCourt bid ‘not about avoiding accountability’

According to the Section 89 panel, the president may have violated the Constitution and anti-corruption laws.

But Ramaphosa, in his application to the ConCourt, has accused the panel of relying on hearsay by former spy boss Arthur Fraser in determining the impeachment case against him.

He has asked the ConCourt to review and set aside the report.

The ATM is also opposing Ramaphosa’s application, while the EFF has requested the court to allow it as a party to the proceedings to challenge the president’s court bid.

Public Protector report

Meanwhile, Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) MP Narend Singh further asked the Speaker on how Parliament will respond to the Public Protector’s report relating to the Phala Phala matter once it is released.

“We have not received any correspondence from the Public Protector as to whether that process has been finalised or not, except for what we have read or seen in the media,” Mapisa-Nqakula said on Thursday.

It emerged this week that the Public Protector’s office has completed its investigation into the farm robbery.

RELATED: Malema denies bullying Public Protector’s office, but demands Phala Phala report

In a letter addressed to ATM leader Vuyolwethu Zungula on 20 January, the acting executive manager of the investigations branch in the Office of the Public Protector, Vusumuzi Dlamini, said the draft report needed to go through internal quality assurance processes before being made public.

Zungula and United Democratic Movement (UDM) president Bantu Holomisa have expressed their dissatisfaction over the matter, saying the choice not to share the draft report was yet another delaying tactic.

“It doesn’t make sense to tell us that the matter is complete but they are still taking it through internal processes. That is another delay tactic from a Public Protector no longer fit to hold office because of how she has conducted herself during this investigation, and we don’t take them seriously,” Holomisa told News24 on Wednesday.