Mpofu accuses Ramaphosa of being a selective decision-maker

The MK Party (MKP) and Jacob Zuma’s legal representative, advocate Dali Mpofu, says the President’s decision making on political figures is selective and therefore illegal.

Mpofu was arguing the party’s case against President Cyril Ramaphosa’s decision not to fire Police Minister, Senzo Mchunu, at the Constitutional Court in Johannesburg.

Advocate Mpofu says President Ramaphosa’s tendency to use what he terms his prerogative power to make decisions is irrational and defeats his purpose to be in a leadership position.

Mpofu referred to the controversial case involving DA MP, Andrew Wheatfield, who was sacked as the Deputy Industry and Competition Department Minister for travelling to the US without permission in March.

“How is it at the best interest of the country that as a decision maker you are at large to dismiss deputy minister Wheatfield for merely going overseas without permission and assume that it is such a bad thing, but the following day you don’t know that and say no, I can’t do that; how could I dismiss a minister on untested allegations? Is that in the best interest of the country? That a person with so much power as a President should be allowed to amplify illegally?,” asked Mpofu.

Zuma and his party, like many other organisations, want Mchunu to be treated with similar severity Wheatfield was subjected to over claims that the Police Minister allegedly interfered with the handling of some high-profile criminal cases at the South African Police Service (SAPS).

MK Party is also against the commission of inquiry that has been set up to probe the claims against Mchunu.

Mpofu argues that it’s going to take too long to conclude and the only thing it will really do is to chow taxpayers’ money, just like the Zondo Commission which spent close to R2 billion in four years.

MK Party national spokesperson, Nhlamulo Ndhlela, says President Cyril Ramaphosa is a constitutional delinquent.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Constitutional Court hearing, Ndhlela referred to Ramaphosa’s announcement of the inquiry as a classical case of political interference, saying he should just allow the KwaZulu-Natal police boss, Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, who spilled the beans on the alleged corruption at SAPS, to arrest those implicated.

“Why are we calling for a judicial commission of enquiry when the judiciary itself is implicated and is complicit? So what; you gonna be having judges presiding over matters of their own and judging themselves? It cant be! That in itself is unconstitutional. The President had the option of forming commissions of enquiry by why must it be a judicial commission of enquiry when you know very well that it is the same judiciary that is complicit and implicated?,” says Ndhlela.

He believes that Ramaphosa is doing nothing more than just breeding judicial sovereignty, where the country’s concerns continue to be sidelined.

Ndhlela claims six months is a long time to wait to prove that certain people are implicit in the deaths of people who die in the country – daily.

Advocate Anton Katz, also representing the MK Party in the case, argues that Ramaphosa breached protocol by appointing an acting minister outside cabinet.

With just a couple of days for Professor Cachalia to assume office at the police ministry, MKP is fighting tooth and nail to nullify the decision, saying it is unconstitutional.

Advocate Katz reminded the panel of judges that the President is only permitted to assign a ministerial role to cabinet members.

“Temporary assignments of posts: Who must it be given to? A cabinet member, not somebody at Wits. It has to be a cabinet minister who has been given a temporary assignment power or function of another member,” says Katz.

Advocate Katlego Monareng, who also represents the MKP, raised concern over corruption allegations against the judiciary, saying it is worrisome that the same people will make decisions in the Madlanga commission that’s set to sit from August.

“In cases where there is any ill conduct among people of the judiciary they should form no part of the decision making in the matter. So, as a matter of security concern, the President ought to act decisively,” says advocate Monareng. Written by Odirile Rabolao