[ad_1]
Vice President of the Supreme Court Raymond Zondo. (Photo: Gallo Images / Veli Nhlapo)
The chairman of the State Capture Commission, Supreme Court Vice President Raymond Zondo on Friday proposed electoral changes to provide a safety net for parliamentarians so that they are not beholden to their party line, particularly when they have a cost to the country.
“It is important for all South Africans to consider a way to protect even a little members of Parliament, who may want to do the right thing for the county where their party may think it is not the right thing …” said State Capture Chairman of the Commission, Vice President of the Supreme Court Raymond Zondo.
“I think in the current oversight system, the evidence that I heard … it’s like there is no oversight in Parliament. Of course, there are some committees that have tried … “
Zondo had raised the possibility of an electoral system based on constituencies, when voters directly elect their deputy, as a possible safeguard for parliamentary oversight.
Historically, this electoral reform was already raised in the electoral work team Frederik Van Zyl Slabbert in January 2003 that proposed electoral districts, together with proportional representation deputies. The Mbeki administration did not act, and the report has gathered dust since then.
Zondo’s comments on Friday come as Parliament must process and adopt electoral reforms to allow independent candidates to stand in national and provincial elections by June 2022 in accordance with a June 2020 Constitutional Court ruling. date, Home Affairs, the department in charge, has not yet published a bill.
During this week’s parliamentary oversight hearings, Zondo has gone where angels fear to tread: electoral reform and how the government of factionalism and ANC politics stifle and even stall Parliament’s constitutional responsibility to hold the executive to account.
On Friday, Zondo said it appeared that overall parliamentary oversight came primarily from opposition parties. “While if everyone took this role seriously, it could make a lot of difference … in terms of corruption and proper governance.”
Unless the system changes, South Africa will not be in a better place of oversight and executive responsibility, should similar claims to State Capture resurface at some point in the future.
Earlier in the week, Zondo expressed puzzled concern about how ANC officials instructed ANC MPs to vote against the August 8, 2017 motion of no confidence on then-President Jacob Zuma (the Constitutional Court had ruled weeks before the obligation to the country overcame the party) and he seemed puzzled how parliamentary procedure is used to divert supervision, albeit with a glimmer of administrative propriety.
Former ANC deputy Zukiswa Rantho chaired the 2017 Eskom state capture investigation of public companies which issued a scathing report now also before the commission, testifying on Tuesday about how Parliament had handled various requests for state capture investigation.
That parliamentary investigation into the capture of the Eskom state unfolded only about nine months after the ANC’s seats in the National Assembly defeated a September 2016 opposition motion for the state capture investigations.
Rantho explained that “a group of people” decided to follow up on the statements made in the Chamber; it did not depend on the committee.
“This may be a failure of the National Assembly, perhaps overlooking what was happening then. At the end of the day, the committee alone made the decision to investigate … ”
It’s that formalism that Matt Johnston, Outa’s Parliamentary Engagement Manager, also highlighted in regard to comments by then-Justice Minister Jeff Radebe that the 2013 landing of Gupta’s wedding guest at the LA military base Waterkloof air force would not need the attention of Parliament. In short, while the Department of Defense and the Public Protector were investigating, Parliament did not have to get involved.
“That is extraordinary! Are you very clear that you correctly reflected what you said? Zondo asked to which Johnston replied:
“It was a dismissive tone in the sense that the issue was being addressed elsewhere and Members of Parliament didn’t have to worry.”
That moment turned into another to stun Zondo in a week of similar moments.
But a matter that is being dealt with in the courts, or the Public Protector, or elsewhere, has been repeatedly raised as a defense, in particular, the consultations of the opposition deputies in the committees and also in the spaces for statements and questions to the ministers in the House.
Questions about political issues like serious corruption and state capture would be stopped in their tracks with reprimands that everyone knew such questions needed substantial motions with provided evidence.
The use of administrative procedures to circumvent supervision also emerged in earlier testimony from opposition MPs.
On Friday, DA deputy Manny de Freitas spoke of a series of 2016/17 letters to the chairman of the transport committee, and to the minister and board of the South African Passenger Railways Agency (Prasa) about the financial derailment there . In vain.
On Tuesday, DA deputy James Selfe told Zondo that despite a damning, albeit preliminary, report from the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) on Bosasa’s jail contracts, the parliamentary correctional services committee had no “desire” to move on.
The 2008 preliminary report took a year to reach Parliament, and when it did, the correctional services committee had a new chairman, Vincent Smith. (Note: Smith is on bail of R30,000 after appearing on Bosasa-related fraud and corruption charges in Palm Ridge Magistrates Court on October 1, 2020).
Selfe testified that he had had a good relationship with the previous chairman of the committee, ANC MP Dennis Bloem, who had joined Cope, and knew that he had been called in for reprimands by then-ANC head whip, Mbulelo Goniwe, and his deputy Andries Nel.
Such criticism was also directed at Khosa, who like Rantho was threatened for her position.
On Friday afternoon, Zondo drew on the testimony of House of Parliament committee chair Cedric Frolick, who in June 2017 chaired four committees to investigate #Guptaleaks. In the end, only the Rantho public companies committee held a investigation.
Much of Frolick’s testimony was about how oversight was allocated only between R50 million and R60 million out of Parliament’s roughly R2 billion.
“Parliament’s oversight function is not adequately funded,” Frolick said, then added: “The committees and the many reports have done a lot of work in terms of exercising oversight … in difficult circumstances.”
In reality, Zondo’s question was not answered why Parliament failed to address issues such as a lack of funds that are central to its constitutional oversight responsibilities for so many years.
Folick has yet to complete his testimony as the commission clashed on time Friday afternoon. While ANC Secretary General Ace Magashule was mentioned as a possible witness to present the ANC’s perspective, neither a time nor date was confirmed. DM
* This article was updated at 6.30 pm
