Guptagate: Parliament dodges investigating President Zuma
Following reports that Lt Colonel Christine Anderson submitted an affidavit admitting that on 17 April 2013, she received a call from Mr Bruce Koloane informing her that President Zuma wanted to know "if everything is still on track for the flight", I asked Parliament to establish an ad hoc committee in terms of rule 214(1), to investigate President Zuma's conduct in the Guptagate scandal.
In response to my request and substantive motion, the then-Acting Speaker of the National Assembly, Nomaindia Mfeketo maintained that these reports did not constitute prima facie evidence for an investigation to take place. Furthermore, she asserted that a breach of the Executive Ethics Code was to be investigated by the Public Protector and Parliament cannot conduct a concurrent investigation.
The Acting Speaker's reasoning is flawed. The reports indicating President Zuma's involvement in the illegal landing of Jet Airways Airbus A330-200 AFB at Waterkloof Airforce Base on 30 April 2013 by the Gupta family emanate directly from a sworn affidavit. An affidavit under oath is substantive evidence and if the Acting Speaker disagrees, she must then clarify what standard of substantive evidence she requires.
Furthermore, with regard to a parallel investigation by the Public Protector into this alleged violation of the Executive Ethics Code, neither the Constitution, nor the Public Protector Act 23 of 1994 nor the Executive Ethics Act 82 of 1998 prevent the National Assembly from conducting an investigation parallel to the Public Protector. In fact, Parliament has both the Constitutional right and duty to investigate the President for violations of the Executive Ethics Code.
Stating that a concurrent investigation with the Public Protector would reflect negatively on the competence of her office is bizarre and not supported by precedent. Former Minister of Communications, Dina Pule was investigated by both Parliament and the office of the Public Protector at the same time.
I have today written to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Max Sisulu, setting out my case. The ill-conceived rejection of my substantive motion for the establishment of this ad hoc committee must be revised.
President Jacob Zuma has once again brought the integrity of the office of the President of the Republic of South Africa into question. As Members of Parliament, and in the public interest, we have a duty and responsibility to ensure that this matter is fully investigated, so that if there is was wrong-doing by the President, he is held accountable.
The Constitution holds that Parliament represents the people of South Africa by scrutinizing and overseeing executive action - the DA will ensure that this provision is upheld.
Statement issued by Lindiwe Mazibuko MP, DA Parliamentary Leader, October 15 2013
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
