Firefighters walk out of the area, as a fire takes hold of the South African Parliament buildings, in Cape Town on January 2, 2022. (Photo by RODGER BOSCH / AFP)
Soon after Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula came under fire for refusing to take responsibility for the fire that gutted sections of parliament on Sunday, it flared up again yesterday afternoon.
Political analyst Daniel Silke said those departments accountable for the fire included the security and protection services, department of defence (national key-points), department of public works (maintenance) and office of the speaker (oversight).
“Heads should roll,” Silke said on Twitter.
The fire was being fanned by the Cape winds and would not die.
Also Read: Parliament fire starts again as flames engulf National Assembly roof
“The almost two-day brave battle by firefighters against the flames that gutted various buildings of parliament suffered a setback when flames suddenly flared up from the roof of the building this afternoon,” said parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo.
Firefighters at the scene were reinforced after the sudden resuscitation of the raging fire.
“There are currently six firefighting appliances and a hydraulic platform, with 34 firefighters actively fighting the flames at the scene,” Mothapo said.
“The resurgence of the fire follows earlier information from firefighters regarding the risky high temperature levels in the gutted buildings.”
Mapisa-Nqakula refused to accept she had “dropped the ball” yesterday.
“It is the responsibility of both parliament and the police to make sure that the security of parliament is 100%,” she said.
“Even though I only started in this position a few months ago, I am not responsible for any dropping of the ball in terms of security in parliament.”
Mapisa-Nqakula admitted the report on a fire in March last year was handed to her by Public Works Minister Patricia de Lille “about two months ago”, and she had yet to be “briefed” on it.
She described it as a “very bulky” report. “We will go through the report and identify the findings, look a the recommendations and act accordingly,” she said.
However, with the fire flaring up, there might be little left to implement.
Hawks spokesperson Brigadier Nomthandazo Mbambo yesterday was coy about how the 49-year-old suspect made it over the tall iron fence surrounding the parliamentary precinct, or over the high steel gates, without being detected.
Nor would she say why the closed-circuit camera system was not being monitored at the time the fire began. “We are still investigating,” Mbambo said.
Mapisa-Nqakula said they had also asked how it was possible that the fire started in an old part of the building and found its way to the new chamber without causing damage along the way.
“We don’t know. We were told the third-floor Old Assembly is totally destroyed,” she said.
She also denied a decision taken in terms of the protection service directive to do away with night staff to cut costs.
Also Read: Watch live: Parliament’s presiding officers brief media on fire
Mapisa-Nqakula confirmed parliament’s security cameras were all working at the time.
De Lille said a team of fire experts arrived in Cape Town on Sunday and were assessing the repairs, costs and timeframe to do the repairs.
“They will provide a preliminary report of their estimates by Friday,” she said.
National Heritage Council of South Africa chairperson Edgar Neluvhalani said the building of the National Assembly and its content represents the memory of the nation, the history of the country and the heritage pride of the future generation.
“It is sad to experience such destruction in our lifetime,” he said.
Human rights activist and lawyer Schalk van der Merwe said it was clear the perpetrator would be charged with arson.
“You must remember arson in itself must not be seen as a minor degree or lesser offence. You can get a term of imprisonment if found guilty.”
He said there was also a precedent that if government buildings were destroyed wilfully and with intent, a person could be charged with sedition and high treason if the objective of the person was to challenge the authority of the state in order to overthrow the government.
– marizkac@citizen.co.za
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
