No confidence ruling: DA wins the war

Johannesburg - Democratic Alliance leader Helen Zille said the Constitutional Court’s finding that Parliament must correct its rules within six months to allow for a no confidence debate was a victory.

The Constitutional Court dismissed an application by the DA to compel Parliament to debate a vote of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma.

The ANC said in a statement that this was a triumph for itself.

However, the court also ruled that rules regulating the Assembly were inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.

"The rules of the Assembly must permit a motion of no confidence in the president to be formulated, discussed and voted for... within a reasonable time," he said.

‘Correct the defect’

The court ordered that Assembly "correct the defect" in its rules so that members or political parties could debate a motion of no confidence. Parliament was given six months to do this.

Zille tweeted after the ruling: “This is a victory for the DA: once the rules are changed, as [the] ConCourt requires, then the DA will be able to bring a no confidence motion.”

The DA’s parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko also tweeted that once the rules had been changed, an MP will be able to bring a motion of no confidence without ANC hindrance.

DA chief whip Watty Watson told reporters the opposition was vindicated by the court order that Parliament remedy the absence of a rule on no confidence within six months.

"This was the principle we believed was worth fighting for and we are vindicated in our belief... today was a victory for our constitutional democracy and the right of Parliament to hold the executive to account."

But ANC chief whip Stone Sizani said the case should never have been taken to court, and the ruling party read the outcome as a victory for the democratic separation of powers.

"The judiciary should not be placed in an uncomfortable position of interfering in internal affairs of an independent arm of the state, unless so directed by the Constitution," he said.

Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke said according to Parliament's rules, Speaker Max Sisulu did not have the power to schedule a motion of no confidence in Zuma.

"...The Speaker acting alone has no residual power to schedule a motion of no confidence in the president to be debated and voted on in the Assembly, and that in any event the relief sought in the appeal has become moot."

No consensus reached

Moseneke said the primary purpose of a motion of no confidence was to ensure that the president and the national executive were accountable to the Assembly.

Mazibuko, supported by seven other opposition parties, tabled a motion of no confidence in Zuma in the Nationl Assembly on 8 November.

However, Sisulu later adjourned a programming committee meeting without the debate being scheduled, on the basis that no consensus had been reached.

The DA took the matter to the Western Cape High Court where it was dismissed by Judge Dennis Davis.

Davis ruled that it was any MP's right to request a no confidence debate, and that such requests were "by their very nature" urgent.

Parliamentary rules

But, because the Assembly's rules did not provide for no confidence debates, Davis could not tell Sisulu when and where the debate should take place.

The high court held that Parliament had the obligation to give effect to the right to debate and vote on a motion of no confidence, but that only the Constitutional Court could hear this matter.

It was argued by Mazibuko's lawyer in the Constitutional Court in March that the high court erred in finding that the Speaker did not have the power to schedule the motion in the event of a deadlock in the programme committee.

Mazibuko submitted that the Assembly rules were inconsistent with the Constitution.

The DA said it was now up to Mazibuko to decide whether she wanted to reintroduce the motion of no confidence in Zuma and she was currently abroad.

"I can't say what Lindiwe will do but the reasons for bringing the motion in November last year are as valid, even more valid, today," Watson said, citing the growing controversy over millions spent on security upgrades at Zuma's home in Nkandla, in KwaZulu-Natal.
We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For 14 free days, you can have access to a world of in-depth analyses, investigative journalism, top opinions and a range of features. Journalism strengthens democracy. Invest in the future today. Thereafter you will be billed R75 per month. You can cancel anytime and if you cancel within 14 days you won't be billed. 
Subscribe to News24
Voting Booth
Zama zama crackdown: What are your thoughts on West Village residents taking the law into their own hands?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Authorities should bring in the army already
10% - 1600 votes
Illegal miners can't be scapegoated for all crime
53% - 8576 votes
What else did we expect without no proper policing
34% - 5434 votes
Vigilante groups are also part of the problem
3% - 517 votes
Rand - Dollar
Rand - Pound
Rand - Euro
Rand - Aus dollar
Rand - Yen
Brent Crude
Top 40
All Share
Resource 10
Industrial 25
Financial 15
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.