Parliament takes very seriously allegations accusing the Speaker of the National Assembly (NA), Mr Max Sisulu, of “abuse of power” and “acting illegally” when in fact the Speaker gave effect to the Constitution.
The Speaker acted impartially and in terms of the law when he swore in Mr Alton Mpheti as a member of the National Assembly to represent the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC) on 15 August 2013.
The position of the Speaker is constitutionally mandated and the impartiality of the Speaker is critical to the democratic institution of Parliament. In his functioning the Speaker is guided by the Constitution, the law, the rules of Parliament and parliamentary practice.
Under the circumstances it was improper for a faction of the PAC representing Mr Mphahlele to question the impartiality and integrity of the Speaker, as was done in the media.
Section 47(3) of the Constitution provides that a member of the NA loses membership if that person ceases to be a member of the political party that nominated that person as member of the NA. The Constitution further requires the Speaker or another Presiding Officer of the NA to administer the oath or solemn affirmation on a member when filling a vacancy in the NA. As with all constitutional duties, section 237 of the Constitution requires that this must be performed diligently and without delay.
On 31 May 2013 the NA was informed that Mr Letlapa Mphahlele was expelled from the PAC as a member of the PAC and as its representative in the NA. Mr Mphahlele successfully challenged the expulsion in court.
The PAC, however, appealed that decision, which had the effect of suspending the decision of the Court. There was thus nothing in law that prevented the operation of the provisions in the Constitution pertaining to membership of the NA and the concomitant duty to administer the oath or solemn affirmation on Mr Mpheti.
Despite the allegations of the PAC, since 31 May 2013 when the matter first arose Parliament was in communication with both parties to the dispute regarding Mr Mpahlele’s membership. Mr Mphahlele was fully aware that he had to interdict the Speaker from swearing in another person and he thus launched an application in the Western Cape High Court. The Speaker informed the Court that he would abide by whatever decision the court arrived at.
When the matter was scheduled to be heard on 31 July Mr Mphahlele requested that his application for an interdict be postponed indefinitely. The failure of Mr Mphahlele to obtain a prohibitory interdict against the Speaker meant that there was nothing in law prohibiting the Speaker from administering the oath or solemn affirmation. By contrast, Speaker had a legal obligation to swear in Mr Mpheti.
The PAC matter has been dealt with in the same impartial manner as other cases of intra-party disputes and it regrettable that the party now seeks to undermine the office of the Speaker as well as Parliament.
