The embattled leader wants his suspension declared unlawful and invalid and he’s also asking the High Court to uphold his suspension of Cyril Ramaphosa over allegations of vote-buying through the CR17 campaign.
Suspended African National Congress (ANC) secretary-general Ace Magashule insists that only he has the right to suspend party leaders.
Magashule, who was placed on suspension in May and was now challenging the sanction, has now filed his responding affidavit following those filed by his deputy, Jessie Duarte and party president, Cyril Ramaphosa.
He also insisted that the suspension letter he issued against Ramaphosa, which was backdated and was said to have been issued without any discussions in the ANC national executive committee (NEC), was legitimate and could only be set aside by a court of law.
The embattled leader wants his suspension declared unlawful and invalid and he’s also asking the High Court to uphold his suspension of Ramaphosa over allegations of vote-buying through the CR17 campaign.
His party has reacted to these issues making it to court, saying that Magashule should know how the organisation functioned by now.
Magashule is certain about the authority given to him through his office and the ANC’s constitution.
This was an argument often made in his 132-page responding affidavit, where he said that the two respondents in the matter did not understand the basis of his application to the court.
Magashule placed national executive committee discussions under the spotlight, even seemingly wanting utterances of ANC leaders on issues such as factionalism to be considered – these conversations found their way into the public domain last month through leaked audio recordings.
And while he said that he had no issue with actually being placed on suspension, he questioned the national working committee (NWC)’s role in the sanction as opposed to that of the NEC.
Magashule complains that rule 25.70, which was used to oust him, was inconsistent with the ANC and the country’s Constitution.
He said that there were more resolutions that had not been implemented in pursuit of the step aside rule and he argues this was all down to factional interests.
Magashule’s case was set for 24 and 25 of June.