MPs on unfamiliar turf for debate on impeachment

● “Are there any objections to the recommendations made by the section 89 panel?”

This is the question National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula will put to MPs on Tuesday at the end of the debate on the report into whether President Cyril Ramaphosa violated the constitution.

It will be the most crucial debate since Ramaphosa took office, possibly deciding his political fate.

If a majority of present MPs – the quorum is 134 – accept the report of the panel led by retired chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, an impeachment committee will automatically be instituted, as required by parliamentary rules governing the possible removal of a president.

The rules are being invoked for the first time as parliament embarks on a process that could end in Ramaphosa becoming the first South African president to face an impeachment inquiry.

If the Phala Phala report is supported by a simple majority vote of the National Assembly’s MPs, a multiparty committee will be tasked to probe the panel’s findings that Ramaphosa may have violated the constitution and other laws.

The rules state that the impeachment committee has to conduct its inquiry in a reasonable and procedurally fair manner, and within a reasonable time.

Ramaphosa would be allowed to appear before the committee to state his case, in what would probably be a protracted process. It is unlikely to begin before the end of the year.

MPs from all parties in parliament would serve on the impeachment committee on a proportional basis.

“The committee must afford the president the right to be heard in his or her own defence and to be assisted by a legal practitioner or other expert of his or her choice,” reads the relevant National Assembly instruction, rule 129M.

“For the purposes of performing its functions, the committee has all the powers applicable to parliamentary committees as provided for in the constitution, applicable law and the rules of the assembly.”

Once the impeachment committee has concluded the inquiry, it will table a report. If it recommends Ramaphosa’s removal, at least two-thirds of MPs — 266 or more — must vote in favour before this goes ahead.

“If the question is supported by at least two-thirds of the members of the assembly, the president is thereby removed from office with immediate effect,” the rule says.

The ANC has 230 MPs, but they don’t all sing from the same hymn sheet.

Some, such as Supra Mahumapelo and Mervyn Dirks, have publicly declared they would vote for impeachment.

The ANC caucus is expected to meet tomorrow, when MPs will be given the line of march by party leaders.

MPs will fully debate the section 89 report, which is not the procedure followed in the impeachment process instituted last year against suspended public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane.

In that case, MPs were not given an opportunity to debate the impeachment

Ramaphosa would be allowed to appear before the committee to state his case, in what would probably be a protracted process. It is unlikely to begin before the end of the year

report, by a panel led by retired Constitutional Court judge Bess Nkabinde, before an impeachment committee was named.

African Christian Democratic Party MP Steve Swart proposed last week that the house have a full debate. “Given the gravity of the panel’s report, I think we need to properly ventilate that issue.”

His proposal was supported by ANC chief whip Pemmy Majodina, with no objections from other parties.

At the time of publication, MapisaNqakula had not decided whether she would allow a secret ballot, as requested by the African Transformation Movement, the EFF and others.

DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube has asked Mapisa-Nqakula to use the rollcall system for the Phala Phala vote, in which each MP’s name is called out and they declare their vote.

The speaker has discretion on how parliament votes but her decision has to survive constitutional scrutiny.