Parliament welcomes today's Western Cape High Court judgment on Parliament's decision to sanction EFF for disrupting 2014 sitting 

29 January 2018

Parliament’s Presiding Officers welcome today’s judgement on processes and findings of the National Assembly, implemented after a hearing into disruptions of a sitting of the Assembly in August in 2014.

The Western Cape High Court issued a discharge of the rule nisi issued by Judge Davis in December 2014. The interim order of Judge Davis interdicted Parliament from implementing sanctions which included suspension without remuneration on several members of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). The majority judgment also dismissed the application of the EFF and 21 of its members (Applicants in the matter) which sought an order to set aside the report of the suspension without remuneration in respect of certain categories of conduct. No order of costs was made.

On 21 August 2014, at a sitting of the National Assembly, the President, appeared for an oral question and answer session with Members of the Assembly. The questions, which the President was to answer, were published ahead of the sitting.

The court found that the Speaker was not obliged to ensure that the answers given by the President are “meaningful”. It found that the Speaker had no power to determine how questions put to the President are answered.

The court further stated: “It is no exaggeration to say that the proceedings of Parliament on 21 August 2014 descended into chaos due to the conduct of the applicants.” It found that the Rules of the National Assembly empowered the Speaker to apply the Rules in such situations as was done on the day in question. It confirmed that ensuring that she maintains order during proceedings was the Speaker’s primary obligation.

The court thus concluded that the allegations of inconsistence and bias appear to be unfounded. The court also confirmed the Tloamma judgment that there is no constitutional or statutory impediment to the Speaker occupying a leadership position within her political party.

The court emphasised that: “Each and every institution has rules constituting a cornerstone on which such institution is built ... Once rules are transgressed or overlooked the proceedings underway in any institution descend into chaos. Chaos having taken over, it becomes impossible for the process intended to be proceeded with to advance. Parliament in its wisdom designed and promulgated these rules. The least expected of members of Parliament is to adhere to them … to enable Parliament as an institution to function and achieve whatever is scheduled for the session. Parties may challenge the rules but that must be done properly and in an orderly fashion in courts. Parliamentary debates on issues for the session can and do remain robust and uncompromising without proceedings descending into chaos and disorderliness. Ill-discipline, chaos and disorderliness are the very antithesis of good Parliamentary practice and the decorum with which the House is clothed.”

Parliament welcomes the affirmation of the correctness of its internal due processes and the court’s upholding of the sacrosanct constitutional principle of separation of powers.

Issued by Moloto Mothapo on behalf of Parliament, 29 January 2018