Daily Archives: May 16, 2014

Madonsela ‘totally shocked’ by Nkandla review


Johannesburg – Government’s decision to approach a court for a judicial review of the public protector’s report into the Nkandla upgrades is “totally shocking”, said Thuli Madonsela, the head of the office, on Friday.

Speaking to Radio 702’s John Robbie, Madonsela said she was completely blindsided by government’s decision regarding her report “especially in the light of the fact that I have received compliance reports from the departments of public works and defence”.
For more http://www.citypress.co.za

Nkandla review is a delay tactic – EFF


The security cluster of ministers’ decision to approach a high court for a judicial review of Public Protector Thuli Madonsela’s Nkandla report was a delay tactic, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has said.

“Cognisant of the possibility that the outcome of the parliamentary ad hoc committee reviewing the Nkandla report may lead to a motion to impeach the president, they have resorted to unnecessary and costly delaying tactics,” spokesperson Mbuyiseni Ndlozi said yesterday.

Earlier, acting government spokesperson Phumla Williams said the ministers were not taking the public protector to court. They wanted her report to undergo a judicial review, possibly in the high court in Pretoria.

The cluster believed Madonsela’s report, titled Secure in Comfort and released in March, lacked clarity in some areas, and that her findings were “irrational, contradictory and informed by material errors of law”.

“It is the ministers’ view that the public protector’s report and the investigation she conducted trespass on the separation of powers doctrine and section 198(d) of the Constitution, which vests national security in Parliament and national executive,” Williams said.

In her report, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela found President Jacob Zuma and his family unduly benefited from a R246m security upgrade to his private Nkandla homestead in KwaZulu-Natal, which included a swimming pool, a cattle kraal, and an amphitheatre.

She recommended, among other things, that he repay a portion of the money.

Zuma has said he would await the outcome of another probe by the Special Investigating Unit before responding to the matter.

The ad hoc committee, which was set to consider Zuma’s submissions on the Nkandla report, was effectively dissolved on April 28.

A report by the committee referring the matter to the fifth Parliament was adopted, following heated arguments between ANC MPs and their opposition counterparts.

The matter was put to a vote after the ANC proposed the matter stand over for the next Parliament to consider after the May 7 elections.

The ANC used its majority to win the vote.

The EFF said it was the ANC’s intention to manufacture a sub judice defence against anticipated parliamentary debate on the Nkandla report.

“This is a proactive attempt by the ANC to block any efforts to have contents of the Nkandla report tabled in the National Assembly during the debate for re-election of President Zuma,” Ndlozi said.

The DA, which was consulting with its lawyers with the view of joining the case as an intervening party, took a similar view.

“We believe that it is part of a greater plan to try and block the reappointment of an ad hoc committee to consider this matter on the grounds of it being sub judice.”

The parliamentary ad hoc committee was the appropriate body to hear arguments should there be inaccuracies in the report.

“This committee will be able to listen to input from the security cluster as well as seek answers to questions which were not fully answered by the report,” the DA said.

Madonsela said earlier that she could not imagine any court finding in the security cluster ministers’ favour.

“The architecture of our constitutional democracy as we understand it requires that the matter be debated in Parliament first,” Madonsela said in a statement.

“Should there be no common understanding, the matter can then be taken to court.”

– Sapa

Ramphele taking a break, won’t go to Parliament


Johannesburg – Agang SA leader Mamphela Ramphele will take a break from politics, she said in an open letter on the party’s website on Thursday.

“I have always said that I was the bridge and would make sure that the reins are handed over at an appropriate time to a new generation of leaders,” she said.

“In the next short while I will take time to reflect on the Agang SA journey and will then return to contribute to building Agang SA and a winning South Africa together with all of you.”

‘Disappointing’performance

Ramphele admitted that her party’s performance in the general elections last week was “disappointing”, but said it had been wonderful to see so many South Africans vote and uphold political freedom.

Agang secured 52 350 votes, or 0.28%, in the national election.

She would remain available to provide advice to the party’s parliamentary pair, national youth forum co-ordinator Nyameka Mgozulu and chairperson Mike Tshishonga.

“After such a taxing journey I do need some time and space to settle my mind and body, enjoy time with family and friends, and reconnect with a personal world I have not had time to enjoy for a considerable time now.

“This is where I believe I can make the most valuable contribution to the party and my beloved country.”

Businesswoman and struggle veteran Ramphele founded Agang SA last year.

DA merger

In early 2014 the Democratic Alliance announced that Ramphele would stand as its presidential candidate. Within a week, however, the partnership collapsed.

Ramphele and DA leader Helen Zille gave conflicting reasons for their political break-up.

Zille said it would have been impossible to meet Ramphele’s demand that she simultaneously lead Agang SA and be the DA’s presidential candidate. She described Ramphele’s proposal as “electoral nonsense”, “unconstitutional” and confusing to voters.

Ramphele said: “Some cannot or will not transcend party politics. The time for this was not right. We see people trapped in old-style race-based politics.”

She said the technicalities of the merger were not ironed out properly. Ramphele said at the time that Agang’s interim constitution prohibited dual political party membership and that a merger with another party could only be done through a national congress, or if the national leadership council met with 20 members in good standing to discuss the decision.

Making a firm commitment to the DA would have been disrespectful to Agang members, she said.-Sapa