By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The African National Congress (ANC) caucus heard firm opposition to a decision that it’s members of Parliament should not vote to adopt the Section 89 panel report on Tuesday.
We have in good authority that ministers Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and Lindiwe Sisulu disagreed with the party line that ANC MPs must vote against the report.
The meeting was described as heated and tense. If the report is adopted, President Cyril Ramaphosa would face an impeachment inquiry.
The ministers told the caucus that the threat to discipline them should they vote in support of the adoption of the report is unconstitutional.
An insider at the meeting said the pair led the charge against a decision that MPs should not support a vote that would lead to Ramaphosa being subjected to an impeachment process by Parliament.
The panel, chaired by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, found that Ramaphosa had a case to answer regarding the theft of foreign currency from his Phala Phala game farm in February 2020.
Not all ANC MPs toed the party line though. Four ANC members – Supra Mahumapelo, Nkosozana Dlamini-Zuma, Thandiwe Zungu and Mosebenzi Zwane – voted for the Phala Phala panel’s report to be adopted.
Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu, along with Bongani Bongo and Zweli Mkhize, all high-profile opponents of Ramaphosa, were not present to cast their votes.
Tandi Mahamehlala initially voted yes but later changed her vote, citing confusion.
She at first said “party line”. When asked again, she said “yes”. Moments later, after realising her answers contradicted each other, she asked for her vote to be recorded as “no”.
EFF leader Julius Malema, however, said changing votes should not be allowed.
“To ask a person to correct the vote is extremely wrong,” he said. “It is wrong to say a person can correct a vote.”
The DA’s chief whip Siviwe Gwarube agreed, emphasising that Parliament’s rules do not allow for MPs to change their votes.
GOOD Party leader Patricia de Lille and MP Brett Herron abstained from voting.
Earlier, Herron had proposed that the vote be postponed. He argued that Ramaphosa should not face an impeachment process until his review application with the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) has been completed.
Ramaphosa, earlier in December, filed papers at the Constitutional Court to review and set aside the Section 89 report.
The Phala Phala panel’s report said that Ramaphosa had a case to answer regarding the money that was stolen from his game farm in Limpopo.
Livestream Video Below:
Video Courtesy of Parliament.