In terms of the South African/United States bilateral agreement, US President Barack Obama would be visiting South Africa soon, AS A GUEST OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA, His Eminence Jacob G Zuma. In terms of protocol, any movement of Pres Obama in South Africa is regulated by a co-ordinating team from the White House and our Presidency.

Lindiwe Mazibuko is quoting Parliament's Joint Rule 7(2) in saying that Parliament has the right to invite Obama to address a joint session of Parliament (see here). But take note of the fact that this Joint Rule reads (including the preceding provision):

7. Calling of joint sittings (1) The President may call a joint sitting of the Houses when it is necessary for -

(a) the President to deliver the annual or a special address to Parliament; or

(b) a purpose mentioned in section 42(5) or 203 of the Constitution.

(2) The Speaker and the Chairperson of the Council, acting jointly, may call a joint sitting of the Houses when necessary.

Section 42(5) states:

"The President may summon Parliament to an extraordinary sitting at any time to conduct special business."

Section 203 deals with the President calling an extraordinary session of Parliament to inform the legislature about the declaration of a state of national defense.

Read correctly, Ms Mazibuko, Joint Rule 7(2) does not give the presiding officers (PO's; the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces) the power to invite the guest of another authority to address Parliament.

What normally happen is that the President would discuss an address to a joint session of Parliament (including the State of the Nation Address [SONA]) with the Cabinet, or any other role player(s), and reach an agreement with regards to theme, time, date, etc. The Leader of Government Business (LOGB; liaison between Cabinet and Parliament) would than make a request to the PO's to consider such a joint session, and suggest the time and date for the joint session.

In the case of the PO's calling a joint session of Parliament, the PO's would discuss the issue before them and decide; jointly, as per Joint Rule 7(2); on a time and date for such a joint session.

Let me make some examples:

1. Joint session of Parliament requested by the President to deliver his annual SONA:

In September 2012, Cabinet agreed to 14 February 2013 as the date for the President to deliver his annual SONA. The LOGB than wrote to the PO's to request them to accommodate the President at that date at 19H00. The PO's than took this request to the national programming task team in October 2012, where it was agreed to. Once the date had been agreed to, Provinces are than asked to decide the dates for their respective state of the province addresses at such time, after 14 February 2013. The proposed date is than submitted to the NA Programming Committee and the NCOP Programming Committee for ratification by the two Houses. The request from LOGB happens within the confines of Joint Rule 7(1)(a).

2. Joint session of Parliament requested by the President to discuss special business:

This is catered for by Section 42(5) of the Constitution, as well as Joint Rule 7(1)(b). The same applies as above. An example hereof is when President Thabo Mbeki, through the LOGB, requested an extraordinary joint session of Parliament on 14 June 2005; to inform the legislature, and the nation, of his decision to relieve his Deputy, Jacob Zuma of his duties as Deputy President of the Republic.

Returning to the statement by Ms Mazibuko, concerning Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan. Parliament did not invite Pres Jonathan to address the joint session on 07 May 2013, as Mazibuko alleges. Following agreement in the South Africa/Nigeria Bi-National Commission (BNC), and acceptance by Pres Jonathan, LOGB wrote to NA Speaker Max Sisulu (in which NCOP Chairperson M J Mahlangu was carbon copied), to request Parliament to afford Pres Jonathan the opportunity to address a joint session of our Parliament at 14H00 on that day. This letter from LOGB is dated 24 April 2013. Following deliberations between the PO's, they sign off on an order on 30 April 2013, calling for such a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament on 07 May 2013 at 14H00.

3. The presiding officers calling a joint session of Parliament:

Outside of a request by the President, through LOGB, the PO's has the power to call and convene a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament, and we have ample example of this happening in the past.

a) The PO's convened a joint session of Parliament on 12 September 2012 to debate Heritage Day under the theme "Social cohesion and nation building".

b) on 19 September 2012, the PO's convened a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament to congratulate Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma on her election as Chairperson of the AU Commission. By special instruction, this joint sitting was also used to bid farewell to Dr Dlamini-Zuma, as a longstanding member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister.

c) Two weeks after the Dlamini-Zuma debate, the PO's decided to call a joint sitting to congratulate Team SA for their performance at the 2012 London Olympics. This joint sitting took place on 16 October 2012.

Mazibuko also wrote a letter to NA Speaker Max Sisulu, imploring him to invite Pres Obama to address a joint sitting of Parliament. Such a request is totally misplaced, as I have stated in my opening that Parliament cannot invite the guest of another authority to address the legislature. Parliament can only consider such a request coming from the authority that has invited such a person.

It would have been much more productive if Mazibuko and the DA accepted the fact that Jacob Zuma is the legitimate president of the Republic. That way they would have understood that they could write him a letter, requesting him to propose Obama addressing a joint sitting of our Parliament. It is within President Zuma's powers to propose this to the Bi-National Commission and the co-ordinating team, subject, of course, to Obama's acceptance thereof.

Secondly, such a letter from Mazibuko would be in terms of NA Rule 43, not Joint Rule 7(2), which she is using so liberally. This is because the Speaker of the NA has no authority over the NCOP. And because Mazibuko decided not to carbon copy the Chairperson of the NCOP, the Speaker find himself in a position where he has to discard a letter from the Leader of the Opposition, because it makes absolutely no sense for the Speaker to consider a joint sitting on his own.

Mazibuko goes further and attack Dr Mathole Motshekga, Chief Whip of the Majority Party in Parliament, stating that Motshekga needs to familiarise himself with NA Rules 219-222. If indeed Mazibuko is taking her work as MP and Leader of the Opposition seriously (as well as her part as a member of the Chief Whip's Forum), she would know that the Chief Whip was not making any decisions in his reply to her tirade (see here ).

He was acting as Chief Whip of the Majority Party and Chairperson of the Chief Whip's Forum, in advising on protocol, processes and procedures in Parliament and Government. The Chief Whip normally speaks with great authority, because he ensures that he has the necessary facts to back up what he says; always conscious that his words would be attributed to both the ANC and Parliament. If Mazibuko cares to remember her real roots, she would be mindful of the adage of "sitting at the feet of a wise man (person)"; and instead of a useless, emotional tirade, she could actually learn a lot from listening to the Chief Whip.

Since the DA "rebranded" itself, with a logo much like Obama's campaign logo, they have sought to style themselves as an extension of the Democratic Party of the United States of America. Having Obama in Cape Town would afford Premier Helen Zille, Mayor Patricia de Lille, and other DA bigwigs the opportunity to rub shoulders with him, steal a little of his shine, and make themselves be likened to him. Just a pity they refuse to adopt more pro-poor policies and actually do something for the poor and marginalised people under their jurisdiction, as Obama has done.

Lastly, placing Obama in Cape Town, would almost likely assure he is in a position to accept the Freedom of the City of Cape Town award - which would be a catastrophe. Before Obama, or any other foreign national, can accept this award, Zille first need to sincerely apologise for calling poor African children, especially from the Eastern Cape "refugees".

In terms of the Constitution of this country; which Madam Zille so 'vehemently defends', South Africa is a unitary state, and only a court of law, with proper justification, can restrict the movement of people inside our borders. Than the DA needs to award the Freedom of the City of Cape Town, and indeed of the Province, to all people of South Africa; making everyone feel free to visit or stay here. Thirdly, the DA needs to openly declare a reversal/amendment of its policies, to ensure that race, ethnicity, origin and economic standing really does not count when visiting or staying in this Province.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter