A key frontier in the battle between factions in the ANC has always been within its parliamentary caucus. It will be no different for President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration. How the ANC handles the motion to remove public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane will be a key indication of whether it has learnt from its past mistakes in exercising parliamentary oversight.
It will also provide a glimpse into the balance of power in the parliamentary caucus and whether Ramaphosa’s reform project enjoys majority support in the governing party in parliament.
While his opponents are certainly louder and more adept at manipulating the public narrative, it is more likely that Ramaphosa enjoys majority support in the ANC’s parliamentary caucus.
The party’s response to the political noise created last week by failed former North West premier Supra Mahumapelo, speaking at the court case of bribery accused and former state security minister Bongani Bongo, is an indication of this.
Mahumapelo resigned after his province burnt in protest against his allegedly corrupt reign. He never hid his affinity for the Gupta family, infamously declaring in his 2016 state of the province address that "unnecessary negativity has been directed at the Guptas" while their "positive contribution" was ignored.
He saw the brighter side of the Guptas’ violation of a national key point, Air Force Base Waterkloof. When they hosted a family wedding, paid for with SA taxpayers’ money intended for poor dairy farmers, he lauded the wedding as an opportunity to showcase Sun City as a holiday destination for Indian tourists.
Zondo has already indicated that failures by parliament in halting state capture is high on his radar
Mahumapelo boldly declared that "there is no way the ANC in parliament will support the motion of the opposition in the form of the DA to remove the public protector, it’s not going to happen".
He was slapped down by Luthuli House in a statement on Sunday, with the party saying no such decision had been discussed or taken by the ANC and that he had spoken out of turn.
The FM understands that even among the majority of the top six ANC officials, there is a sense that Mkhwebane’s conduct is problematic, given the numerous scathing court judgments against her.
Those of Mahumapelo’s ilk in the parliamentary caucus will take a hard-line stance in defence of Mkhwebane — even before an independent panel determines whether such proceedings are warranted.
A stance such as that put forward by Mahumapelo can only harm the ANC as it seeks to restore trust among the electorate.
National Assembly speaker Thandi Modise said, in response to Mkhwebane accusing parliament of unconstitutional and unlawful behaviour in instituting proceedings for her removal, that "the substantive motion complied with the form requirements in the rules".
It is clear Modise is not making the same mistakes as her predecessor, Baleka Mbete, who rode roughshod over the rules of parliament to protect former president Jacob Zuma. Mbete’s conduct culminated in a scathing Constitutional Court finding that parliament failed to hold Zuma accountable after its earlier judgment on the Nkandla matter.
The chair of the state capture commission of inquiry, deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo, has already indicated that failures by parliament in halting state capture is high on his radar.
In the end, a failure by parliament to properly conduct its oversight role over Mkhwebane’s office to appease factions within the ANC would be another example of the governing party riding roughshod over the constitution and would mark Ramaphosa’s presidency as no different from Zuma’s.
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.