The United Democratic Movement (UDM) has threatened to interdict next Tuesday’s vote on the motion of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma pending the Constitutional Court’s pronouncement on its bid to have the matter decided on by secret ballot.
The ConCourt on Tuesday ordered all parties intending to oppose the UDM’s application for an order on the secret ballot to file their opposing papers by the end of business on Friday April 21.
UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said he’s already instructed his lawyers to write to Baleka Mbete‚ the Speaker of the National Assembly‚ requesting a postponement of the much-anticipated special sitting on April 18 until the matter had been finalised by the ConCourt.
Holomisa said should Mbete reject his request‚ the UDM would seek an urgent court order to interdict next week’s special sitting that has been convened on an urgent basis‚ with MPs recalled from their Easter recess.
The UDM is asking the ConCourt to decide whether the motion should be decided by a secret ballot‚ arguing that this should be allowed as the President is elected by MPs in this fashion.
They approached the highest court in the land after Mbete rejected their request for a secret ballot.
Holomisa said the urgency of the motion of no confidence motion needed to be "sacrificed" in order to get clarity on the secret ballot issue "once and for all".
Moloto Mothapo‚ the spokesman for parliament‚ has however said the debate would not be postponed "unless the sponsor decides to withdraw the motion".
The motion of no confidence is sponsored by the DA and it has been joined by the EFF.
DA Chief Whip John Steenhuisen has thrown the ball back into Mbete’s court‚ arguing that the motion now belonged to parliament as it had already scheduled it and anyone could request a postponement.
Steenhuisen said a precedent was set in this regard in 2015 when Mbete went ahead with a similar motion sponsored by Agang despite the party’s attempt to withdraw it as it unsuccessfully sought to secure a secret ballot.
Mothapo said Mbete was not opposing Holomisa’s court bid but differed with him on whether she had powers to determine if MPs could deal with the motion via the secret ballot.
"With regard to whether motions of this nature ought to be conducted by way of a secret vote‚ the Speaker holds no position on the matter. Where the Speaker and the UDM disagree is in relation to the powers of the Speaker under the Constitution to make such a determination."
Mothapo reiterated that a Western Cape High Court ruling in 2015 in the Agang matter made it clear that there was no provision in the Constitution or the rules of parliament for motions to be voted on by secret ballot.
However‚ professor of constitutional law at the University of Cape Town‚ Pierre de Vos‚ said new rules adopted by the National Assembly last year gave Mbete much more power.
"Because the rules have changed‚ the Speaker’s assertion that she has no discretion (to order a vote of no confidence) is false. The new rules say she has discretion."
National Assembly rules number 4 and 103 respectively give the house and Mbete the authority to voting procedures for a particular sitting.
The new rules allow the Speaker to alter voting procedures and for the house to suspend any rule for a specific sitting.
De Vos said the ConCourt was unlikely to dictate to parliament how to manage its internal arrangements.
"So the court might tell the speaker to exercise her discretion‚ but won’t say how she must exercise that discretion‚" he said.
TMG Digital/TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.