Faizel Patel, 2016-03-31
The Constitutional Court has ruled that President Jacob Zuma’s response to the Public Protectors Nkandla report was inconsistent with the constitution.
The country’s highest court in the land has also found this morning that the National Assembly failed to prioritize Thuli Madonsela’s report and hold the president accountable.
It has ordered Zuma to pay back the money that was spent on non-security upgrades at his home within 45 days.
The Constitutional Court has also once and for all clarified that the Public Protector’s remedial action is binding and ignoring is against the law.
Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng says these orders cannot be second guessed.
“No binding and constitutionally or statutory liaisons decision may be disregarded ‘willy-nilly’. To do otherwise would amount to a licence to self-help. It is not open to any of us to pick and choose which of the otherwise effectual consequences of the exercise of constitutional or statutory power will be disregarded and which given heed to.”
Mogoeng says parliament also failed to hold Zuma accountable.
“The public protector is this one of the most invaluable constitutional gifts to our nation in the fight against corruption unlawful or undue enrichment, prejudice and impropriety in state affairs and for the betterment of good governance.”
In a judgment that went further than most people expected, the constitutional court found that president Jacob Zuma failed to uphold and defend the constitution.
Chief Justice Mogoeng says Zuma may have acted on the wrong legal advice, but the illegality still stands.
The highest court in the land found the public protectors remedial action is binding and must be adhered to.
It also found that the National Assembly should’ve hold the president accountable.
It’s now up to treasury to determine the amount of money that Zuma needs to pay back personally and report back to the constitutional court within 60 days.
Zuma must also reprimand the ministers who absolved him.
Meanwhile moments after the Chief Justice`s judgement against Zuma, the DA and their leader Mmusi Maimane lodged a motion to impeach the president in terms of section 89 (1) of the constitution at the speaker’s office in Cape Town.
The DA’s James Self said: “We would want that motion to be debated as a matter of urgency. We will now expect the National Assembly and the majority party to do the correct thing and support a motion of impeachment in the president.”
The Constitutional Court judges took just over a month to weigh up arguments from the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), the Democratic Alliance (DA), the National Assembly speaker and Public Protector Thuli Madonsela.
All 11 judges agreed unanimously on the judgment.
Zuma had previously refused to pay back the money saying Madonsela’s orders, which she made in her report entitled ‘Secure in Comfort’, two years ago, were merely recommendations.
The president spent R246 million on non-security features at his Nkandla home in KwaZulu-Natal.
The Constitutional Court’s judgment on the Nkandla matter has been described as a seminal moment for South Africa’s democracy.
0 Comments