Publications
Partners
Johannesburg - EFF leader Julius Malema has called on the Constitutional Court to "do the right thing" when handling the matter before them regarding the money spent on upgrades at President Jacob Zuma's home in Nkandla.
"We are saying to the Constitutional Court, please do the right thing," Malema told thousands of EFF members who had marched with him from Newtown to the court in Braamfontein.
"This matter is in the interest of the nation and we must bring it to finality because people have reported about it, have spoken about it for far too long now. It has to come to an end."
Malema said the Economic Freedom Fighters did not have a personal gripe against Zuma himself, they just wanted him to be held accountable.
"All we wanted was to get the president, the head of the executive to be accountable. That's all we are doing. We have no problem with the man, we have a problem with everyone who is not compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of SA."
Remedial action
The EFF wanted Zuma to comply with Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's recommendations that he pay back a portion of the money spent on upgrades at his Nkandla homestead, despite Police Minister Nathi Nhleko's conclusion that he owed nothing.
Both the EFF and the Democratic Alliance had filed applications with the court to get Zuma to comply with Madonsela's report, "Secure in Comfort".
The EFF argued that Zuma failed to comply with the remedial action set out by the public protector and wanted the court to make an order compelling him to do so.
If he did not, he would infringe a series of obligations expected of him as president.
Malema criticised the Democratic Alliance and others for only jumping on the bandwagon when the matter was finally taken to court.
"We have said that the president will have his day in court and many people never believed us, but today everybody wants to pretend that they have always agreed with us, including the Democratic Alliance which is now claiming victory on something they rejected much earlier."
The DA, in a separate review application, would argue that Zuma's failure to engage rationally with the public protector's findings and remedial action pertaining to him was irrational, illegal, and unconstitutional.
