By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Western Cape High Court has struck from the roll, with costs, an urgent application by ANC MP Mervyn Dirks challenging his precautionary suspension.
Judge Andre le Grange said Dirks failed to set forward circumstances that rendered his case urgent, and he could also not state the reasons why he thought he could not get recourse later.
Dirks’ lawyers were pushing for the reinstatement of his membership of parliament’s standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) before the committee’s meeting scheduled for 4pm on Tuesday.
The meeting was set to discuss claims that President Cyril Ramaphosa did not pass on information about the ANC’s use of public funds for its campaigning to authorities.
Dirks wrote to the chairperson of Scopa, Mkhuleko Hlengwa, requesting a probe into Ramaphosa’s conduct.
He refused to withdraw the request – and was suspended from the ANC by the party’s chief whip in Parliament, Pemmy Majodina.
He was accused of “unbecoming conduct” and shut out of Scopa activities, including the WhatsApp group.
This followed the leaking of an audio recording, in which Ramaphosa is purportedly heard telling the ANC’s national executive committee about his knowledge of the use of public funds for internal party campaigning, and even encouraging the cover-up of such activities.
Dirks filed an urgent application that he be allowed to attend the meeting in his capacity as a member of Scopa. He said that, as the committee whip, he carried an important swing vote.
His lawyer, advocate Nikiwe Nyathi, insisted that Majodina acted unlawfully by suspending him from the committee.
Nyathi submitted that only the majority party’s national working committee, national executive committee, provincial executive committee or provincial working committee could suspend Dirks. And any work done until this alleged illegality was fixed would be unlawful, and would require repeated visits to the court.
The ANC’s lawyer, advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, said the ANC had the right to place its members on any committee of its choosing, when it wanted to.
Ngcukaitobi argued the matter should be struck because the notice was unreasonable and the respondents were given about five hours to respond despite the fact that Dirks had five days since his suspension.
Scopa’s Tuesday meeting was also no basis for urgency as Dirks, as an MP, was entitled to attend and address the meeting, he said.