Court papers reveal that Zuma alone rules MK party

Papers filed in the Western Cape High Court in Cape Town make it clear that uMkhonto weSizwe party (MK) is a one-man show led by Jacob Zuma.

This is admitted by Zuma in his replying affidavit to a review application brought by 10 MPs who have been removed from the National Assembly and the party.

Application of 10 MK party members dismissed

The 10 MPs lost their case against the party on Monday and are now under threat of eviction from their parliamentary homes in Cape Town. Their legal team is considering other possible legal options.

The applicants are Thamsanqa Khuzwayo, Isaac Menyatso, Citron Motshegoe, Augustina Qwetha, Nomado Mgwebi, Ntombenhle Mkhize, Sydwell Masilela, France Mfiki, Senzo Dlamini and Agnes Mogotsi.

Zuma’s response to the application contains some astonishing admissions: that the party was his concept and brainchild – which is disputed – and that party governance was to take place in three phases. The party was now in its second phase of evolution where an “interim leadership core” is responsible for running the party.

This gives Zuma “the powers to deploy all members of the MK party” at his “sole discretion until the holding of the elective conference at which democratically elected structures will be put in place”.

ALSO READ: Court case reveals dark truths about MK’s inner workings

The ruling by Judge Katharine Savage reads in part: “Despite the concerning picture painted by Mr Zuma regarding the manner in which the MK party operates and makes decisions involving its members, it remains for the applicants to show that the prerequisites for the interim relief sought by them have been met.”

The sacked MPs claimed MK vested dictatorial powers in Zuma, who admitted there was chaos in the MK ranks. Zuma claims to have no personal knowledge of 90% of the 800-plus names submitted as potential candidates for parliament.

The MPs claim in court filings: “Under these circumstances, the MK party is not in a position to lawfully govern itself or provide its members with just administrative action.

“Until it has resolved the challenges it has admitted to be facing and has a constitution that protects the rights of its members, it should not be permitted to add or remove anyone in the National Assembly.”

The 10 MPs believe they were removed to make way for defecting EFF members such as Floyd Shivambu and Mzwanele Manyi.

By Zuma’s own admission, he is making all the decisions. This, says the MPs’ legal team, makes a mockery of SA’s democracy.

ALSO READ: Fired MK party MPs suffer blow in court as interdict dismissed with costs

Advocate Simba Chitando, who represented them, said in a statement: “In my view the evidence put forward by Zuma leaves no doubt MK party is being governed in a manner that violates the 10 MPs constitutional rights, which Justice Savage acknowledged.

“Unfortunately, the judgment is silent on the laws regulating evictions. The legal team shall have a discussion on the next steps, which may include an application for leave to appeal.”

The MPs were sworn into parliament on 2 June, but on 7 August the speaker of the National Assembly was informed by MK chief whip Sihle Ngubane that their party membership had been terminated “and that this is final, all international mechanisms having been exhausted”.

The MPs say they were never informed and no formal processes were followed. They claim their removal was inconsistent with MK’s draft constitution and SA’s constitution. Most gave up jobs and houses to take up positions in parliament.

The 10 MPs were denied access to their parliamentary accommodation on 19 August, but were given 30 days to vacate after their lawyers intervened. Instead of receiving their full parliamentary salary of R102 000, they were paid just R12 000 on 15 August.

Zuma claimed the MPs resigned for a variety of reasons: two for defying orders not to attend the first sitting of parliament; three for failing to attend the swearing-in ceremony and five for defying an order not to attend the same ceremony.

The judge dismissed the MPs’ application on the grounds that key facts had not been placed before the court and confirmatory affidavits from eight of them arrived too late to allow MK to respond. There was also no replying affidavit to Zuma’s response, which left factual issues unchallenged.

NOW READ: ‘People appreciate what MK party is doing’ – Bongani Baloyi on why he’s joining Zuma