South African Communist Party (Sacp) general secretary has cast doubt on the fitness of President Cyril Ramaphosa as the country’s head of state.
This comes after the Constitutional Court on Friday ruled that parliament’s decision to protect Ramaphosa from facing an impeachment inquiry was unconstitutional.
This comes as an independent inquiry had found that Ramaphosa has a case to answer in relation to the robbery on his Phala Phala farm in 2020, where $580 000 was stolen – some of the money was found stuffed inside furniture.
In 2022, parliament stopped Ramaphosa from facing an impeachment committee by using a vote in which a majority of ANC parliamentarians voted against the adoption of the independent report.
Mapaila expressed his concern with this judgment at a Sacp event held in Mpumalanga on Sunday.
“We welcome this Constitutional Court judgement…this impeachment must come quickly, it must come quickly because if it delays, we will not have any government infrastructure, everything will be sold.
“There are people who are running operation Vulindlela, these are business people that are sitting right inside the Presidency, they are sharing the resources of this country, a new state capture.
“They are now even trying to sell water to the people,” he said.
Mapaila’s comments come at a time when opposition parties such as the ATM and the EFF are calling on Ramaphosa to step down and clear his name in the impeachment committee.
Parliament’s credibility
In a scathing media statement on Saturday, the Sacp appeared to be criticising the ANC’s decision to use its majority in parliament to protect Ramaphosa from being held accountable.
“Given the fact that parliament is the primary law-making body in our system, it is notable and concerning that there have been a handful of Constitutional Court decisions that have placed parliament on the wrong side of the law in terms of both its processes and decisions.
“If the Republic cannot count on Parliament to be the best performing institution in upholding the laws, it means our system is in precarious waters.
“While we recognise the separation of powers between the branches of government, we also must hold parliament to a much higher standard of accountability regarding interpretation and application of the law,” said the party’s Mbulelo Mandlana.
What will the DA do?
Mandlana also criticised the DA’s reaction to the court’s ruling.
“The DA’s continued participation in the government of national unity (GNU) and its apparent condemnation of Phala Phala reflect a crisis of conscience for them.
“The opportunism manifested by this posture spells out their longstanding crisis of inconsistency: to pose on one side as law-abiding liberals and continue seeking power and positions even in conditions that contradict their supposed law-abiding principles on the other.
“The best manner to express their displeasure and alignment with those that criticise the Phala Phala scandal following this case is a total withdrawal from the GNU. However, we all know that the DA will not do that because it doesn’t stand on any real principle but seeks to position itself for parliamentary advantage,” said Mandlana.
