By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
@MasiLosi.
Embattled ANC secretary-general (SG) Ace Magashule has argued, via his lawyer, that President Cyril Ramaphosa is using the ANC’s step-aside rule to fight factional battles within the party.
Magashule was suspended by the governing party in May in a letter signed by ANC Deputy Secretary-General Jessie Duarte in which the party said that he would be temporarily suspended until the outcome of his legal proceedings.
The rule states that any party members accused of criminal activity should step aside.
Magashule is appealing a judgment of the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, which found that his suspension was lawful.
Arguing the appeal before the Supreme Court of Appeal on Wednesday, advocate Dali Mpofu, SC, submitted that Ramaphosa has reshuffled executives in his Cabinet who were step-aside “candidates”.
To reshuffle executives who were charged with corruption raises questions over whether the rule is being implemented in a factional manner, the court heard.
He once again pointed out that the requirements of the ANC rule were not met by Duarte, and the ANC’s national working committee (NWC).
Mpofu argued that Duarte was not authorised to and did not have the jurisdiction to effect his suspension. He said there was no basis upon which the suspension could be justified.
“We don’t have evidence of the NWC giving the necessary instruction to the SG. Then the DSG herself must exercise discretion. She didn’t.
Duarte was only appointed to act as the SG on 10 May 2021 – days after he was suspended, he submitted.
Mpofu also submitted that Ramaphosa’s testimony before the State Capture Commission was proof that the president himself turned a blind eye to corruption during his tenure as the deputy president.
“He is guilty of corruption. Because he said he was aware of it,” Mpofu said.
Advocate Wim Trengove SC, appearing for the respondents, has asked the court to dismiss Magashule’s bid for leave to appeal.
“So we submit, with the greatest of respect, that the application for leave to appeal should be dismissed with costs, including the costs of three counsel, on the attorney and client scale – for two reasons. Firstly, the scurrilous and unfounded attack on the bench, which we submit is scandalous and for which there was no justification at all, and secondly for the introduction of this supplementary heads of argument merely to abuse the court’s platform to insult the president.
Trengove said the heads of argument accused the judges of deliberately distorting or ignoring facts to benefit the respondent, with the aim of justifying the court’s predetermined outcome.
“No perception of bias – no subtleties here. They accuse you of deliberately and dishonestly giving a judgment to favour the one side over the other.”
Judgment was reserved in the matter.