Joint press statement by DA, COPE, IFP:
Motion of no confidence must be debated
South Africa's democracy faces the ultimate litmus test this week.
We have asked the National Assembly to resolve, in terms of provision 102(2) of the Constitution that it has no-confidence in President Jacob Zuma on the grounds that, under his leadership:
- the justice system has been weakened and politicised;
- corruption in the public service has spiralled out of control;
- unemployment levels continue to increase;
- the economy is weakening; and
- the right of access to quality education has been violated.
In as much as the Constitution gives the National Assembly the power to elect the President, it equally allows the National Assembly to withdraw such support through a motion of no confidence.
In a constitutional, functional and effective democracy, the following must now happen:
First, the notice we gave for a debate of no-confidence in the President must be approved by the Speaker and placed "below the line" on Tuesday's Order Paper. Anything "below the line" represents business that is ready to be dealt with by the House but waiting to be scheduled.
Second, the Chief Whips of all the political parties must agree that our no-confidence motion be debated as a matter of priority at a closed Chief Whip's Forum on Wednesday.
Third, the debate must be scheduled when the National Assembly's Programming Committee meets on Thursday morning. This committee is chaired by Speaker of the National Assembly, Hon. Max Sisulu.
Finally the debate will take place and at the end of the debate a vote will be taken by way of a secret ballot.
It must be made clear to the ANC, on both of the above committees, as well as to the Speaker, Hon. Max Sisulu, that any attempt to block this motion as being intimated in the media is unconstitutional.
It is imperative that the ANC recognises Section (1)(d) of the Constitution, which provides for "a multi-party system of democratic government, to ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness" and that, consequently, it allows for Section (102)(2) to be invoked on the basis of the failures we outlined. Any stonewalling or rejection of the right to have the debate will result in a constitutional crisis.
Issued by the DA, November 12 2012
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
