Story audio is generated using AI
Parliament’s section 89 impeachment committee has resolved to oppose separate legal challenges by the EFF and the African Legal Practitioners’ Association (Alpa) over its decision to rescind the recommendation of advocate Thandazani Madonsela as evidence leader.The committee voted 19-9 on Wednesday in favour of opposing both applications in the Western Cape High Court. Committee chair Makashule Gana said parliament’s legal representatives would now prepare the necessary court papers.“The decision has been taken by the majority of the committee,” Gana said, confirming that 19 members supported opposing the applications while nine voted against the motion.The EFF approached the Western Cape High Court after the committee withdrew its earlier recommendation of Madonsela, arguing that the decision was unlawful and should be set aside. The party has also challenged the committee’s handling of the appointment, arguing that the conflict-of-interest concerns raised against Madonsela did not justify reversing a decision already taken.Alpa has launched a separate application, arguing that the committee misconstrued its powers and acted irrationally, arbitrarily and in bad faith when it rescinded Madonsela’s nomination.The dispute follows President Cyril Ramaphosa’s objection to Madonsela being appointed to lead evidence in the impeachment inquiry. Ramaphosa raised concern that Madonsela could have a reasonable apprehension of bias because he had been removed from the Judicial Service Commission following the 2022 interviews for the appointment of chief justice.The president also pointed to Madonsela’s recent legal advice to the ANC on matters relating to the impeachment inquiry as a potential conflict of interest.However, parliament’s constitutional and legal services office had previously found that there was no conflict of interest that would disqualify Madonsela from serving as evidence leader. The committee nevertheless voted to withdraw his recommendation. Madonsela subsequently wrote to the committee accepting the decision to withdraw his name from consideration.The EFF has accused parliament of allowing the executive to influence its decisions. EFF MP Omphile Maotwe said the party would continue challenging what it regarded as poor parliamentary decision-making.“When we change our own resolution because the executive says so, we are no longer a legislature, we are simply an extension of the presidency,” Maotwe said.The decision to oppose the court applications was itself contested in the committee. The MK Party, EFF, ATM, ActionSA, Bosa and UAT opposed the move to defend the committee’s decision.The legal challenges come as the committee prepares to continue with the impeachment process. Gana said the committee would proceed with its work while the court matters were before the judiciary.The committee is also expected to finalise its terms of reference, which will determine how evidence is presented and tested during the inquiry. The terms are expected to clarify the role of the evidence leader, Ramaphosa’s participation, the treatment of witnesses and the principles governing the committee’s assessment of evidence.The section 89 process stems from the findings of an independent panel appointed by the National Assembly, which found that Ramaphosa may have a case to answer over the theft of about $580,000 in foreign currency from his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo in 2020.Ramaphosa has challenged the panel’s findings in court, arguing that it applied the wrong legal standard in determining whether there was sufficient evidence for an impeachment inquiry.The committee’s decision to oppose the latest court challenges means the appointment of an evidence leader remains tied up in parallel legal and parliamentary processes. Gana said the committee would resume the process of appointing an evidence leader once judgment had been delivered.Business Day
