EFF loses Parliament suspension challenge
Senior EFF members, including Julius Malema and Floyd Shivambu, have lost their Western Cape High Court challenge of Parliament’s rules of suspension, reports Business Day.
Parliament’s suspended them for ‘disruptive behaviour’ during the 2023 State of the Nation (Sona) address.
The EFF members’ suspension prevented them from attending 2024’s Sona address. A full Bench ruled the EFF members’ legal objections ‘stand to be dismissed’. The EFF also lost earlier court bids to attend 2024’s Sona.
The EFF is still deciding if it will appeal, which it can do only at the SCA or Constitutional Court.
In 2023, EFF members repeatedly interrupted President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Sona address, with points of order, and had to be forcibly removed when they stormed the stage.
Malema, Shivambu as well as Marshall Dlamini, Sinawo Tambo, Vuyani Pambo and Mbuyiseni Ndlozi, were found guilty of contempt by the Powers and Privileges Committee.
Their sanction by the national assembly included their suspension from parliamentary activities for the month of February 2024, during which the Sona address was held.
In February, they asked the High Court to effectively overturn their suspension, so they could attend.
On the morning of the February address, the court dismissed their application.
With the urgent bids dismissed, the EFF members persisted in their challenge against the committee’s suspension sanction.
According to Business Day, the EFF members argued the related laws and regulations failed ‘to provide sufficient guidelines’ when deciding sanctions and was unconstitutional. However, the full Bench dismissed their challenge.
Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Dennis Davis said the argument that the committee required an independent decision maker ‘never got out of the legal starting blocks’.
Nowhere in the law or the committee’s rules does it allow for ‘delegation' of its functions to others. The committee itself must investigate. The EFF members argued that lack of legal guidelines for imposing sanctions has the potential for abuse by political opponents.
Davis, however, said Parliament legally ‘has significant powers and thus discretion ... in respect of the severity of the appropriate sanction'.
None of the other lesser sanctions ‘were sufficient’ given the ‘grossly disorderly conduct’ found by the committee. Davis noted the EFF members chose not to attend the only committee hearing to give their version, after Malema called it ‘a kangaroo court.
Davis dismissed the case, but made no costs order due to the EFF making out a proper case that raised important constitutional questions.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.
