Publications
Partners
Many a person may criticize the events of the past week in Parliament when a scuffle (brawl, fray. fracas) broke out at the time when the President was challenged to provide answers to the spending of the R 246 million on his private residence under the banner of ‘security upgrades’
The matter at this point in time having been investigated by three ‘independent bodies’ – the interministerial committee, the public protector’s office and the special investigations unit.
As was expected the ministerial committee and the special investigations reports doesn’t pass blame onto Jacob Zuma for the unauthorized ‘upgrades’ but in the Public Protector’s report it being categorically found and stated that Zuma and or his immediate family benefitted from the happenings at Nkandla, and that the President should pay back a substantial amount of the money that was spend on items that are not security related. (“Fire pool, underground parking, visitor’s area, etc”).
This week when the President finally dragged himself to Parliament to answer questions on the matter, he was rightfully confronted by the Economic Freedom Fighters, as he once again wanted to shift blame that the Minister of Police has to decide if and how much he has unlawfully benefitted from the upgrades, and or whether he should be held liable to repay any of the taxpayers money spent.
Amazingly the mandate for this decision is passed on to the Minister who owes his daily bread and appreciation for living in a lap of luxury, to the man that he must now rule against. What a ludicrous situation to even consider such an action to be in any way, lawful, and representative of the true nature of events.
Rightfully so, the opposition members representing the Economic Freedom Fighters, insisted that Zuma should answer to parliament ‘when he would be paying back the money’ which then broke out into total mayhem in the legislature, and the speaker eventually suspending the sitting in that the EFF stood firm by their question, and Zuma, conspicuously sitting quiet in his corner and allowing the speaker to act, whereas the obligation and questions stated and put by the opposition should have been the fact that he was to address. But like he always does, he once again, hid behind the role payers in Parliament to defend him, but when the public protector previously recommended that action be taken against individuals in a report, after having conducted an investigation as a Section 9 Company in terms of the Constitution, Zuma, didn’t waste any time and axed people ad nauseum, yet now when the same investigation and investigator rules that he unlawfully benefitted, he decides that ‘what is good for the goose is not good for the gander (President in this case).
This kind of attitude is selective application of rules and regulations and when he is implicated, the rules and regulations are swayed to distanciate him for any wrong doing, and this he has become an expert at – use the judicial system, as taxpayers are paying the legal fees in any case, to the hilt and in the process delay action indefinitely against him. We have seen this on so many occasions that it has become the norm rather than the exception.
The fact that Julius Malema and his party (EFF) stood up in parliament against him, has been long overdue and we should actually commend them for their actions as the opposition has for the past 20 years basically been denied to act in this manner especially within the decorum of legislature, but the fact that they wanted answers from the man that is being implicated, needs to be asked and answered as a matter of urgency.
This kind of action is not unique to our country, and we have seen and witnessed incidents all over the world where altercations break out in the legislature and assembly of other countries in the world, so maybe this is the way that we should adopt, as we have been manipulated in the past 20 years to just accept anything that is forthcoming and decided upon within the National Assembly and now we have a man and a party, that has absolutely no fear as to what may happen, but simultaneously insist on answers that are long overdue.
