Ramaphosa should instruct Sisulu to retract and issue a public apology for attacking the Judiciary
12 January 2022
The Democratic Alliance (DA) is calling on President Cyril Ramaphosa, in his capacity as the Head of the Executive, to instruct the Minister of Tourism, Lindiwe Sisulu, to retract and issue a public apology for undermining the Judiciary and casting aspersions on its integrity in a recent opinion piece. Even if no formal finding of wrongdoing has been made on Sisulu’s remarks, President Ramaphosa has an obligation to protect public trust in the constitutional integrity of other arms of government.
We will also call on the minister to appear before Parliament’s Ethics Committee where she will be asked to explain how, as a Member of Parliament, she reconciles her attack on the Judiciary with the Parliamentary Code of Conduct. This Code stipulates, among others, that members “act on all occasions in accordance with the public trust placed in them”. It also demands from members that they “discharge their obligations in terms of the Constitution, to Parliament and the public at large, by placing the public interest above their own interests” and that they “maintain public confidence and trust in the integrity of Parliament and thereby engender the respect and confidence that society needs to have in Parliament as a representative institution.”
In an op-ed titled “Lindiwe Sisulu: Hi Mzansi, have we seen justice?”, that was carried by Independent Online on 7 January 2022, Sisulu launched a direct attack on the Judiciary and appeared to insinuate that black judges were “house negroes” whose interpretation of the law had no African or Pan African ideological grounding. She claimed that: “Today, in the high echelons of our judicial system are these mentally colonised Africans… (whose) lack of confidence permeates their rulings against their own…”
As an incumbent member of the national Executive, Minister Sisulu (i) violated the Executive Code of Ethics by engaging in behaviour inconsistent with her role as a Cabinet Minister, and (ii) violated the principle of separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary by insinuating that members of the Judiciary were misinterpreting the law to pursue vested agendas.