MK party vs IEC: Exclusion verdict to be handed down on Tuesday

The Electoral Court is expected to hand down an order on Tuesday in the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party’s bid to overturn the Electoral Commission of SA’s (IEC) decision to bar former President Jacob Zuma from being one of the party’s candidates to parliament after the 29 May polls.

The party turned to the court in a last-ditch effort to have Zuma on the ballot and appeal the IEC’s decision last week to uphold an objection to the former president’s candidacy.

Order

The matter was heard by Judge President Dumisani Zondi, judges Lebo Modiba and Seena Yacoob, and professors Nomthandazo Ntlama-Makhanya and Moss Phooko.

After a day of intense arguments, judge Modiba said the court was considering handing down an order and deferring the reasons for later because of the constraints of the IEC’s timetable.

Disenfranchising millions

Earlier, counsel for Zuma’s MK party Dali Mpofu argued the IEC had no right to say who could be elected to the National Assembly.

Mpofu said the matter was essentially about the denial of a person’s right to participate in politics, and accused the IEC of wanting to disenfranchise millions of people who want to choose their leader via the newly formed MK party.

“At face value, we are dealing with the right to vote for those who support this party and former president Jacob Zuma…We find disturbingly that the attitude of the electoral commission in this matter is exactly the opposite. The attitude has been: ‘Let’s see where we can catch him … Let’s ensure he doesn’t come out alive.”

“That cannot be the attitude of a South African institution, let alone an independent institution whose job it is to ensure that our Section 19 rights (every citizen is free to make political choices) are realised,” Mpofu argued.

ALSO READ: ‘Law breakers should not be lawmakers’: Ngcukaitobi argues that Zuma does not qualify for Parliament

Zuma guilty

Counsel for the IEC, Advocate Thembeka Ngcukaitobi argued that Zuma was found “guilty of a crime of contempt” and that President Cyril Ramaphosa’s proclamation on remission was never to undo a sentence imposed.

Ngcukaitobi said Section 47 (1) (e) of the constitution speaks about the sentence imposed by the court.

“The reason we have Section 47 (1) (e) is because it is a legislative determination that certain convictions and certain offences would preclude a person from exercising their rights to come to Parliament.

“The reason they put it at 12 months is that it is a signal of the seriousness. Not only of the conviction but of the offence. The reason they also make it clear that there should be no option of a fine is that the constitutional drafters are trying to tell us is that serious lawbreakers should not be lawmakers,” Ngcukaitobi argued.

Ngcukaitobi said Zuma and the MK party knew in February that the former president would not be able to contest elections, adding that the former president does not qualify to go to the National Assembly.

Ngcukaitobi implored the court to dismiss the MK party’s application because it had no merit.

ALSO READ: Mpofu: IEC has no power to rule on Zuma’s exclusion