Search

Cyril Ramaphosa faces his first motion of no confidence in parliament.

Updated: Dec 4, 2020





The African Transformation Movement (ATM) says South Africa has lost confidence in President Cyril Ramaphosa. I dare say... they are not alone with their thoughts and if the motion was left to the public there would be an overwhelming majority in agreement.

The National Assembly will debate a motion of no confidence in President Cyril Ramaphosa on Thursday, 3rd December, 2020.


PLEASE NOTE: This matter has been postponed to February, 3rd and 4th, 2021.


It will be the first time MP's will debate Ramaphosa's fitness to hold the highest office in the land since his election in February 2018.

The motion was brought by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) in February amid load-shedding and the country plunging into economic crisis at the time.


Secretary to the National Assembly Masibulele Xaso told a meeting of the assembly's programming committee on Thursday last that speaker Thandi Modise had approved the ATM’s request for the house to debate the motion.


Reasons by the ATM for the debate include the following but not limited to;

Ramaphosa failed to disclose to Parliament that he benefited financially from his presidential campaign in 2017.

The party also cited Ramaphosa's failure to disclose to parliament the R500,000 donation from late Bosasa boss Gavin Watson, “misleading or lying” to the nation by saying there would be no load-shedding until January 13 2020, and the failure to act against public enterprises minister Pravin Gordhan and the Eskom board for allegedly misleading him on the load-shedding programme.





ATM president Vuyolwethu Zungula said….” It is safe to say this country has a parallel cabinet but still no positive outcome. South Africa has allowed President Ramaphosa a free hand to do things the new dawn way but the country keeps sliding.” Zungula also said despite many summits, investment conferences and pledges, the country continued to sink. The business community, that was very supportive of Ramaphosa, had become fatigued and exasperated because of his inaction.”


Ramaphoria' is no more.


Many citizens had hoped the election of Ramaphosa would shape a new identity with a better future for all South Africans. Today citizens feel he has let them down. All the talk about stopping corruption, there were high expectations which has now dwindled. As it was the African National Congress that were “skating on very thin ice” before Ramaphosa came to rule, today as President of the country by his own admission he prefers to protect the interests of the ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC) over and above "the people" which sends out the wrong signal as to where his loyalties rest.


Ramaphosa has got the basic fundamentals wrong and leopards do not change their spots.


The previous President Jacob Zuma survived 8 motions of Debate of No confidence in parliament. The first was submitted in March of 2010 by The Congress of the People’s Mvume Dandala which was followed by attempt's by the former Leader of the Democratic Alliance, Mmusi Maimane.


Please refer the list beneath displays some of the No confidence attempt's previously submitted..


18th March, 2010.

The Congress of the People’s Mvume Dandala proposed a motion of no confidence in the president for his “failure to live up to the expectations of a broad spectrum of South Africans”.

The African National Congress’ Ngoako Ramatlhodi moved to amend the motion to state that “the house has full confidence in the president of the Republic of South Africa and appreciates his leadership of the government and nation”.

Of the members present for the vote, 235 voted to amend the motion, 88 voted against amending the motion and 5 abstained. As a result, the amendment was passed.

With regards to the new motion – that “the house has full confidence in the president” – 242 members of parliament voted in favour, 83 voted against and 6 abstained. The motion, as amended, was agreed to.


Submitted by the former leader of the Democratic Alliance, Mmusi Maimane and his reasons for calling upon the motion were no different to the present day motion of no confidence in Cyril Ramaphosa submitted by The African Transformation Movement (ATM).

Please refer the list beneath displays just 4 of the No confidence attempt's previously submitted by the Democratic Alliance.


17th March, 2015.

1. Independent institutions of the state have been politicized and weakened;

2. Unemployment has escalated to unprecedented levels;

3. The economy is at its weakest point in recent history;

4. The right of access to quality education has been violated; and

5. Corruption has spiraled out of control.

The motion was unsuccessful.


1st March 2016

Maimane again brought a motion of no confidence against Zuma.


He moved that Zuma’s “irrational, irresponsible and reckless leadership had done immeasurable damage to the economy; eroded investor confidence; dramatically weakened the rand; and placed fiscal and economic stability at risk”.


On 5th April 2016

A motion to remove Zuma was proposed by the leader of the opposition, Mmusi Maimane.

He listed the following reasons, among others, in support of Zuma’s removal:


1. Zuma’s failure to comply with the remedial action taken by the public protector as set out in her report ‘Secure in Comfort’” was unlawful and inconsistent with the constitution,

2. Zuma’s actions in requesting the police minister Nathi Nhleko to determine the amount he should repay for the costs of upgrading his private home in Nkandla” was inconsistent with the public protector’s prescribed remedial action and, as a result was inconsistent with the constitution,

3. Zuma had “seriously violated the constitution when he undermined the public protector’s findings by instituting parallel investigative processes and when he failed to implement the public protector’s remedial action”,

4. Zuma’s “action to appoint Mr Menzi Simelane as the national director of public prosecutions is inconsistent with the constitution and invalid”.

The motion was put to vote and did not pass.


10 NOVEMBER 2016

This motion of no confidence was proposed by the leader of the opposition, Mmusi Maimane. He moved that:

1. Zuma’s irrational, irresponsible and reckless leadership –

2. important institutions of state have been captured by private interest;

3. state resources, notably state security, law enforcement and prosecuting authorities have been mobilised to shield those interests from public scrutiny and investigation;

4. the president has allegedly attempted to evade accountability to the public protector and frustrated her efforts to fulfil her constitutional mandate; and

5. his derelict leadership has resulted in a collapse of public confidence in the president of the Republic of South Africa, a government at war with itself and that this ultimately has undermined efforts to restore confidence in the South African economy.”

The motion was unsuccessful.


Motions continued to further include; Section 89 of the South African constitution allows for the removal of the president. This is sometimes referred to as “impeachment”, although that term is not used in the South African constitution.

To my knowledge this has been the only attempt to remove Zuma.



In closing, a two-thirds majority is required to pass such a motion and if the matter is unsuccessful in my opinion this will be the start of more "no confidence submissions " to follow.





LINK.

SEE the attached LINK that refers to; The President and National Executive. Chapter 5, Section 83-102 and specifically Section 102 Motions of "No Confidence."

https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/constitution/chp05.html




Action Is Antidote To Despair.








Author Shar Grainger.

Published via #BreakTheSilenceAboutSouthAfrica on December, 2nd, 2020.

34 views0 comments

Subscribe Form

+44 (0) 7421826111 and +44 (0) 7579771875

©2019 by Break The Silence About South Africa. Proudly created with Wix.com