Umsebenzi Online, Volume 14, No. 05, 18 February 2015
In this Issue:
* Accept the will of the people, respect our democratic institutions
Accept the will of the people, respect our democratic institutions:
Disruption of Parliament on 12 February 2015 an orchestrated move to
undermine democracy and embarrass SA
>From the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa
We are all disturbed by what transpired at the State of the Nation Address
(SONA) last Thursday because our image as a people was tarnished and our
reputation as a country damaged. As an institution we cannot accept this.
South Africa needs to speak with one voice in condemning conduct which is
not consistent with our Constitution.
What happened was not an accident. It was a premeditated, coordinated act of
inflicting a serious assault on our Constitution - an act directed at our
democracy.
It is common cause that in the build up to this SONA, the Economic Freedom
Fighters (EFF) made it known that they were going to disrupt the event of
SONA by blatantly disregarding the rules, conventions and practices of
Parliament. These actions amounted to an imposition of their will and
strategies on all Parties and Parliament without following accepted
democratic and procedural practices provided for in the Constitution and our
rules. They made several statements in the media confirming their threat and
even had a countdown clock proudly displayed on their website.
It must be emphasised that these threats were not isolated, but consistent
with a pattern of behaviour that the nation has witnessed since the
beginning of the 5th Parliament.
The basis for making these threats was addressed and is without reasonable
cause from the perspective of the parliamentary programme. The EFF wrote to
us expressing their intention to continue a question session to the
President of the Republic South Africa that was disrupted in the National
Assembly. We advised them that this is a special joint sitting called for
the specific purpose of dealing with SONA. Additionally, based on the rules,
we indicated that a joint sitting does not deal with matters that are in
either of the two Houses, i.e., the National Assembly and the NCOP. Their
matter was later referred to a National Assembly Programme Committee that
was able to secure a date of a new question time with the President on 11
March 2015. Over and above that, we received a day before SONA, answers
from the President to questions that could not be completed due to
disruptions. These answers have since been sent to the relevant Members that
had asked the questions. So, on our part as Presiding Officers, we did
everything in our powers to accommodate the concerns that the Members in
question had. Consequently, we were, therefore, looking forward to a
successful SONA.
Simultaneously, various sectors of society raised serious concerns about the
possible disruption to SONA. Religious leaders took it upon themselves to
engage all political parties in Parliament. Most parties were receptive and
cooperative except for a few who believe that they have something to gain
from the chaos. In their media statement issued two days before the SONA
(10 February 2015) on why they rejected the mediation efforts of the
religious leaders, the EFF, amongst others, boldly declared their intentions
to continue with their threats: "We have an appointment with Jacob Zuma on
Thursday, the 12th of February and we will never retreat!"
Obviously, such statements could not be taken lightly. We had to plan and
act with all possible scenarios in mind. As we saw, the threat did
materialise into action, the intention of which was to stop the SONA. But
they failed. The Address happened. All what transpired on that day was not
something spontaneous, happening in the heat of the moment. The disruptions
were well planned, choreographed and synchronised. These actions were meant
to embarrass Parliament and South Africa at large.
A similar political stance and strategy has been adopted by the Democratic
Alliance (DA) in the 5th Parliament wherein it has embarked on strategies
that undermine and disrespect and erode the authority of the Speaker and the
Chairperson as the joint heads of Parliament. We want to emphasise that this
is not a complaint about exercise of party politics, but about politics that
disrespects and undermines legitimate democratic institutions and its
authorities. The strategy by the DA of threatening to put a motion of no
confidence against the Speaker and the Chairperson each time their political
strategies do not work is ill advised and actually seeks to subvert the
democratic processes by wanting to make the Presiding Officers part of their
political plans and threatening to sanction them each time they do not get
their way. This amounts to intimidation and, consequently, a possible
breach of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial
Legislatures Act.
Collectively and cumulatively, these actions were meant to embarrass South
Africa in the eyes of the world by disrupting and collapsing SONA, and
thereby create a wrong impression that there is a constitutional crisis and
chaos in our country, a view that we firmly reject.
Our democracy was tested but our institution stood its ground. Our democracy
triumphed, the disruptions failed. The post-SONA plan of those who conceived
the failed disruptions is to shift the blame on the Presiding Officers. This
must also fail.
The Presiding Officers are expected to be impartial and apply the rules
fairly. It cannot be acceptable in a democracy that they are attacked every
time they make a ruling against a particular individual or party. This can
promote anarchy and disorder, thereby negating the impartiality and
authority of the Presiding Officers. This is a form of intimidation.
Presiding Officers must not be influenced by the fact that they will be
attacked for their decisions and, consequently, apply themselves with a
measure of partiality that is created by this cloud or threat hanging over
their heads. This is introducing politics of bullying in our discourse and
that should not be allowed by South Africa and as Presiding Officers we are
firmly against that. This, South Africans, is a threat to our Constitution.
Another key fundamental issue is to ask hard questions about people that
either wanted to prevent or disrupt the President of the Republic of South
Africa to make his address to the Nation about the plans of government, they
are as follows:
. Why is there a need by some Parties to seek to deny South Africans
a chance to hear the plans made by their government to address aspirations
and challenges of society?
. On what basis can a Member or an opposition party exercise
oversight over the Executive if they have not given themselves a chance to
listen to the government's proposals?
. How will parties and Parliament perform their constitutional
responsibilities of passing laws, exercising oversight over the Executive,
and ensuring public involvement in decision making occur outside the
framework and practices established in our democratic dispensations?
. Is the stage not being set for Parliament to become a platform of
more political theatrics and less engagement on substantive issues; thereby
forgoing the notion of Parliament as a People's Assembly - an agent of
change and transformation, and a key instrument in addressing the
developmental challenges of our people?
South Africans cannot allow a situation where their institutions breed
anarchy and hopelessness. Parliament must be allowed to function
effectively. Parliament and the people of South Africa should not be
deprived of addressing head on key developmental challenges as articulated
in National Development Plan and our project of building a united,
non-racial, non-sexist and prosperous South Africa. These are bigger
questions that must worry all South Africans as forward looking people, who
want government to improve their lives and place our country on an
irreversible path of sustainable change as espoused in our Constitution.
Parliament and its rules are made for Members who behave honourably. If MPs
do not behave in an honourable manner, we have nothing at our disposal in
our institution nor in the rules to protect democratic institutions. Even
our parliamentary security personnel would not cope because of its size,
training, capacity and scope of work. The recent events and pattern of
behaviour that has been displayed by some Members in the 5th Parliament has
been very instructive in this regard.
On the day in question, the EFF members were asked to leave the chamber
after they openly defied the Chair and insisted on rising on points of order
or questions of privilege even after the Chair had given comprehensive
rulings on the matter. When the members refused to leave, which is in itself
a disregard of the authority of the Chair, the Serjeant-at-Arms and the
Usher were asked to assist. When this intervention failed, the Chair called
for the assistance of Parliament's Protection Services.
In terms of section 7(f) of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of
Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, 4 of 2004 (Powers and Privileges
Act) a person may not fail or refuse to comply with an instruction by a duly
authorised staff member regarding the presence of persons at a particular
meeting in the precincts. Those who were in the House would have seen that
at the point that that Parliament's Protection Services got involved the
rest of the EFF members formed a wall around the members who had been asked
to leave, and started attacking members of Parliament's Protection Services
with water bottles and 'makarapas'. It was at this point that the Speaker
ordered the assistance of the Security Services.
Section 199 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ("the
Constitution") provides for the establishment, structuring and conduct of
Security Services. The Security Services of the Republic consist of a single
defence force, a single police service and any intelligence services
established in terms of the Constitution.
In terms of section 4 of the Powers and Privileges Act, members of the
Security Services may enter and remain in Parliament for the purpose of
performing any policing function; or performing any policing function in the
precincts, only with the permission and under the authority of the Speaker
or the Chairperson. When there is immediate danger to the life or safety of
any person or damage to any property, members of the Security Services may
without obtaining such permission enter upon and take action in the
precincts in so far as it is necessary to avert that danger. On 12 February,
the Presiding Officers acted in terms of this section.
It is our firm convictions that the solution to increased involvement of
Security Services in Parliament is for the disorderly behaviour of some MPs
to stop forthwith.
One EFF Member has proudly boasted in a radio interview that they beat up
security personnel. Another Member has reportedly even threatened to bring
weapons into the Chamber. With regard, to the recent threat of bringing
firearms into the Chamber, we have once again taken that threat seriously
and have since directed the Secretary to Parliament to follow up on this
threat. We have to take these threats seriously because, as experience has
taught us, they are not empty but real threats.
Our democracy and Parliament did not envisage this; we have no means at our
disposal to control such acts because Parliament is for Honourable Members.
In such circumstances, we have no option but to apply instruments in our
society that have been established with the purpose of dealing with acts of
grave disorder through the Powers Privileges and Immunities Act and other
relevant pieces of legislation.
We must address the reported signal scrambling as well as the microphones
that malfunctioned. We need to state categorically that Parliament does not
own any device that scrambles communication or cellular phone. We have not
ordered the use of such devices. Our view as Presiding Officers is that our
democracy should not be placed in such a situation where, in Parliament, the
use of such devices is even contemplated. We reiterate that the House is
for honourable Members. However, security services deploy their assets when
they do their work as part of their operations. We are not operational in
our relationship with the security services. Once the scrambling of the
signal was brought to our attention, we asked the Secretary to attend to it.
We will look at tightening and improving our systems in order for us to
ensure that this does not become a precedent. The investigation on the
microphones that malfunctioned on the day is inconclusive. Our Technical
Section has committed to strengthening the back-up system, to prevent a
repeat of what happened on 12 February.
It is our firm convictions that the solution to increased involvement of
security services in Parliamentary business is for the disorderly behaviour
of some MPs to stop forthwith. Let us repeat: Parliament's rules and
security personnel are meant to service Members that recognise the rules and
conventions of Parliament including the office-bearers legitimately elected
to lead Parliament.
The problem is not with the Presiding Officers. The problem is not with
Parliament's rules. The problem is not with our security personnel. The
problem is known. The problem is some MPs who behave disorderly with the
express intention of collapsing Parliament.
A democracy like ours needs few things if it is to function optimally and
endure:
. All of us must accept the will of the people which they express when
they vote parties and their members into Parliament. They allocate
parliamentary seats to parties in a proportional representation system.
. Members and parties must cooperate and tolerate each other in order for
Parliament to function even though by its very nature, Parliament is made up
by different parties which are in competition and disagreement over
policies.
. We must all respect our institutions - especially the three arms of the
State (that is, the Judiciary, Legislative and the Executive). The reason
some democracies survive over years is because of the strength of their
supporting institutions. Conversely, some democracies fail to consolidate
and others even crumble because of the failure or weakness of supporting
institutions due to the disrespect or deliberate undermining of these
institutions
We cannot stand by and watch our democracy collapse in our face. As
Presiding Officers we will be undertaking the following steps:
. We will be meeting all political parties to understand better their
intentions with the 5th Parliament. Every plenary sitting should not be
turned into a platform for squabbles and walk outs.
. The media is an important stakeholder that should also be engaged. In
our view, media reports seem to present those who plan to disrupt Parliament
as heroes or victims; and those of us who are trying to bring order and
defend our institutions, as aggressors, villains, or party hacks. We are
yet to see any media house condemn acts of disorder in Parliament as acts
that threaten our Constitution. By contrast, the Presiding Officers have
been subjected to all sorts of ridicule in the media.
. We will initiate a dialogue with the MPs on our electoral system; and
how a proportional representation system should function to strengthen our
democracy and uphold our Constitution.
. We will initiate a dialogue with the MPs on the Oath administered to
them when they were sworn it.
. We will use the Speakers' Forum to cascade our process to provinces as
some of them are faced with a similar challenge. An example is the incident
of July 2014 where a group of EFF members forced their way into the Gauteng
Legislature, throwing bottles around, looting, and even assaulting some
people.
We believe that these steps will help restore order and integrity to our
Parliament. We count on the support of all South Africans to ensure that
our Parliament focuses on the challenges facing our country.
The Presiding Officers are elected by the respective Houses (the National
Assembly and the NCOP) in terms of the Constitution. Acting jointly, they
are the Executive Authority of Parliament. They are empowered by the Powers
Privileges and Immunities Act, among others, to exercise joint control and
authority over Parliament's precinct. They preside over the meetings of the
respective Houses, which entails maintaining order, interpreting, applying
and ensuring compliance with the rules and practices of the House, and
ensuring the smooth conduct of proceedings according to laid down procedures
and practices.
We want to assure South Africans that Parliament is not in a crisis. What
is a crisis is some political parties failing to understand why they were
elected to Parliament in the first place and the persistent stance of not
respecting the outcomes of the will of the people. This is the crisis that
requires the collective attention of our Nation. We are ready and prepared
as Presiding Officers to do our part as committed South Africans, without
any fear or favour. But we can only do so much on our own. Parliament and
the whole nation must rally against acts of assault on our Constitution.
We thank you!
National Assembly Speaker, Baleka Mbete and National Council of Provinces
Chairperson, Thandi Modise. This statement was issued by the Parliament of
the Republic of South Africa, 17 February 2015 (Parliament, Cape Town, Media
Briefing, 17 February 2015):
<http://www.parliament.gov.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=7112>
http://www.parliament.gov.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=7112. The statement
was further fully covered by the Communist University (CU), Johannesburg, 18
February 2018
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Umsebenzi Online" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, just send email to
[email protected]
For more options, archives, pages and files, visit the group web site at
http://groups.google.com/group/umsebenzi-online?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Umsebenzi Online" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
