JOHANNESBURG – Former President Jacob Zuma and his uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) have escalated the political drama surrounding allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Police Commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, by lodging an urgent application with the Constitutional Court. The application seeks to halt the implementation of President Cyril Ramaphosa's response to the bombshell claims.
Filed on Friday, the MKP is asking the apex court to declare Ramaphosa's decisions invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution. These decisions include placing Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on leave, appointing Professor Firoz Cachalia as acting minister, and establishing a commission of inquiry chaired by outgoing acting Deputy Chief Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. Zuma and the MKP are demanding that these decisions be declared invalid and set aside with immediate effect.
Furthermore, they are seeking "further and alternative appropriate, just and equitable remedies including, where necessary, interim relief maintaining the status quo ante (before) the impugned decisions, pending the judgment." The MKP also wants the Constitutional Court to refer the matter back to President Ramaphosa, instructing him to make constitutionally compliant decisions within 15 days of the court's order, if applicable.
Dr John Hlophe, MKP deputy president and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, stated in court documents that Zuma is bringing the application in his personal capacity as a voter, taxpayer, citizen, and former president. "The events dealt with in this matter involve the subversion and multiple infringements of the fundamental rights of a citizen including political and socio-economic rights," Hlophe explained.
The MKP's legal move follows the Presidency's rejection of a letter of demand from their lawyers, T Mpumlwana and Associates. The letter called for Ramaphosa's resignation and the withdrawal of his public announcement made last Sunday regarding the commission, Mchunu's leave, Cachalia's appointment (effective from August 1), and the appointment of Mineral and Petroleum Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe as acting police minister until Cachalia assumes the position.
In response to the MKP's demands, the Presidency's acting head of legal and executive services, Geofrey Mphaphuli, stated that they would not acquiesce, arguing that the terms of reference for the commission had yet to be published in the government gazette and Cachalia's appointment had not been finalised. "The complaints by your clients are therefore premature, ill-informed and misplaced and any approach to the courts would similarly be so affected," Mphaphuli asserted.
Hlophe's founding affidavit argues that the matter is of urgent public importance and that taking it to lower courts would be futile. He also highlighted the "continuing depletion of taxpayers’ money" as a relevant factor.
A key point of contention for the MKP is the placing of Mchunu on leave of absence. Hlophe argues that this decision is "irrational, tainted by bias, blatant inconsistency and other forms of favouritism," as there is no provision for the president to take such action, which he describes as "a fancy phrase for suspension with pay."
Hlophe further alleges that Mchunu is a close ally of Ramaphosa in the ANC's factional battles and has overseen the classification as "top secret" of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate’s (IPID) report into the February 2020 theft of foreign currency at the president's Phala Phala farm. "The inference is therefore irresistible that were it not for their political and factional affinities, Ramaphosa would have duly dismissed Mchunu as he is entitled and legally empowered to do…like Caesar’s wife, the political friends and allies of the president must be above suspicion,” added Hlophe.
The appointment of Professor Cachalia is also under fire. Hlophe contends that it is "inconsistent with the Constitution, ultra vires, irrational, in breach of the rule of law and evidence of the failure by Ramaphosa to fulfil his constitutional obligations."
Regarding the establishment of the commission to investigate judicial capture or the involvement of unnamed members of the judiciary in collusion with criminal syndicates, as alleged by Mkhwanazi, Hlophe argues that this is another breach of the Constitution. He asserts that the Judicial Service Commission and the Magistrates Commission are the only state bodies constitutionally and legally authorised to investigate judicial conduct.
The MKP is requesting that the Constitutional Court hear the matter on July 28, subject to Chief Justice Mandisa Maya's direction.
Adding fuel to the fire, a video clip recently surfaced featuring Mchunu, with an ANC banner in the background, stating that people should not forget that it was the ANC that fought for the army and the SAPS to have black generals.
"I'd like to mention that it's the ANC that fought and at a certain point of the struggle, it appointed black generals, so that we, as black people, can have black generals in the army and the police," Mchunu is heard saying. "During the Struggle all generals, in the army and the police, were white. I'd like to take this opportunity and highlight to our generals in the army and the police that they shouldn't trample on this opportunity that was made possible by the ANC…So they must respect these positions, in a way that it was meant to when we fought for this freedom."
It is worth noting that on the Sunday when Mkhwanazi made his allegations against Mchunu and other police officers, he was wearing his Special Task Force uniform, surrounded by officers in camouflage and face masks.
Meanwhile, speaking at an ANC Musa Dladla Region's Mandela Day event in Ngwelezane, KwaZulu-Natal, Mchunu stated that he is ready to clear his name at the commission of inquiry.
The Constitutional Court battle promises to be a significant event in South Africa's political landscape, with the MKP challenging President Ramaphosa's authority and raising serious questions about the handling of the allegations against Minister Mchunu and the integrity of the judiciary.
Follow Us on Twitter
