30 May 2019
The EFF notes the ruling of the High Court which has granted Trevor Manuel urgency and ordered the EFF to apologize to him on defamation. This related to our correct observation, which Manuel does not dispute, that he was conflicted in interviewing Edward Kieswetter because they are friends.
The EFF has instructed its attorneys to appeal against this judgment of the High Court which ordered the EFF to apologise to Trevor Manuel in respect of an EFF statement issued in the political context. Our constitutional jurisprudence is very clear on separating the standard to be applied to allow for free political speech which must not be confused with normal private interactions. The court seriously erred in not applying the correct standard.
The nub of our statement was that Trevor Manuel was disqualified from participating in the appointment of Edward Kieswetter to the important public position of SARS Commissioner. Indeed Trevor Manuel admits that he was conflicted. The nature of that conflict is neither here nor there.
The EFF is the second largest opposition party in the South African Parliament and a guardian of the Constitution. Its key concern is to prevent corruption. Overlooking a conflict of interest of any nature while exercising a public power is a classical form of corruption.
It is also very surprising and unusual that this routine complaint was accorded the status of urgency when in our view there was nothing urgent about it.