The Western Cape high court has reserved judgment in the case involving Jacob Zuma and 10 MPs expelled from his uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party, who are challenging their removal from parliament. (Delwyn Verasamy/M&G)
The Western Cape high court has reserved judgment in the case involving Jacob Zuma and 10 MPs expelled from his uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party, who are challenging their removal from parliament.
The court on Tuesday heard an urgent application filed by the 10 who were ejected from the party last month and are seeking an interim interdict to prevent the swearing-in of their replacements while they await a review of their expulsion and subsequent removal from parliament.
The 10, who were among 18 fired MK party MPs, also want the court to declare that they remain members of the party until their membership is lawfully terminated and that they may continue serving as legislators unless they join another political party.
They argue that their sudden removal, just a month after they were sworn in, was unlawful and aimed at making way for replacements, including former Economic Freedom Fighters deputy president Floyd Shivambu.
The MK party, which succeeded the Democratic Alliance as the official opposition, has contended that the MPs were removed after they were found to have been incorrectly listed as candidates in the party’s slate for the May general elections.
In his founding affidavit, former MK party MP Thamsanqa Khuzwayo said the affected legislators were never notified, either orally or in writing, of the party’s intention to terminate their membership.
Khuzwayo asserted that no proper process was followed and said his and Isaac Menyatso’s resignations were fabricated to facilitate their removal and the subsequent appointment of Shivambu and other former EFF members.
The party replaced Sihle Ngubane as parliamentary chief whip with Mzwanele Manyi who also defected from the EFF.
Court documents name the other expelled MK party MPs as Citron Motshegoa, Augastin Qwetha, Nomado Mgwebi, Ntombenhle Mkhize, Sydwell Masilela, France Mfiki, Senzo Dlamini and Agnes Mogotsi.
“These individuals were stripped of their positions as MPs and had their party memberships revoked just a month after taking office, making way for a new group of MK MPs,” their founding affidavit read.
Among the new appointees are former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe, former Prasa chief executive Lucky Montana, and former Transnet chief executive Siyabonga Gama, who all held senior positions at state-owned enterprises during Jacob Zuma’s presidency.
The ousted MPs have argued in court that their abrupt removal has left them financially vulnerable, because they resigned from previous employment to serve in parliament. They also allege that the MK party lacks a ratified constitution, operating instead on a draft that fails to establish clear procedures for disciplinary processes.
Parliament has confirmed receiving a notice from the MK party’s secretary general, Ngubane, regarding the party’s decision to remove 15 of its representatives from parliament.
On Tuesday, advocate Simba Chitando, representing the expelled MPs, argued that Zuma’s responses in his court papers were contradictory. He explained the urgency of the application, stating that the MPs were fighting to keep their parliamentary positions from being filled, adding that without the interdict, nothing would prevent the nomination of new members.
After presenting his argument, Chitando suggested that a settlement between his clients and the MK party might be in the works and that only eight of the 18 dismissed MPs had been replaced.
He pointed to correspondence from National Assembly speaker Thoko Didiza, who warned the MPs that their positions could be filled if no interdict was granted, rendering the pending review application “pointless”.
He argued that the urgency of their situation was evident. He further contended that without the court’s intervention, the applicants and their families would face severe consequences, including being forced to vacate their residences in parliamentary villages.
Chitando highlighted the absence of a formal process in the MK party to address the MPs’ removal, arguing that the expelled MPs and their dependents would be left without recourse.
In response, advocate Nikiwe Nyathi, representing the MK party, called for the case to be dismissed because of the applicants’ failure to submit a replying affidavit.
Nyathi argued that the allegations made in the MK party’s answering affidavit had gone uncontested, and attempts to address them through arguments in court were procedurally inappropriate.
She also requested a punitive costs order against the expelled MPs.
The Mail & Guardian
mg.co.za
