Who is fit to judge the President?

By Palesa Matlala

• The Democratic Alliance wants stricter standards for MPs serving on the impeachment committee, saying it is Parliament’s most important accountability process.

• The Economic Freedom Fighters and uMkhonto weSizwe Party warned that the phrase “fit and proper” could be abused for political purposes if it is not clearly defined.

A fierce political battle has broken out in Parliament over who should be allowed to serve on the committee investigating President Cyril Ramaphosa.

The fight centres on a proposed rule that members of the Section 89 Impeachment Committee must be “fit and proper” people.

The proposal was raised during a Rules Committee meeting on Wednesday as MPs debated changes to Parliament’s impeachment rules.

The Democratic Alliance is pushing for the rule, arguing that the impeachment committee carries a far greater responsibility than ordinary parliamentary committees.

DA chief parliamentary leader George Michalakis said the committee deals with the most serious accountability process available against a president.

“This is the most serious accountability mechanism. It requires higher ethical and general conduct,” he said.

Parliament’s legal adviser Michael Prince said the National Assembly has the power to introduce such a requirement.

However, he warned that the phrase must be clearly defined and justified because it could affect the constitutional rights of MPs.

Prince said there must be proper consultation before any such rule is adopted.

The proposal immediately drew criticism from opposition parties.

uMkhonto weSizwe Party MP Mzwanele Manyi warned that the phrase was vague and open to political manipulation.

“The phrase must be removed entirely or be accompanied by reviewable criteria,” said Manyi.

Economic Freedom Fighters chief whip Nontando Nolutshungu agreed, saying the proposal clashes with Section 47 of the Constitution, which already sets out who can serve in Parliament.

She argued that if the DA wants stricter requirements, it should first seek a constitutional amendment.

The debate comes as questions continue over whether some MPs facing legal or ethical controversies should be allowed to sit on the impeachment committee.

Michalakis pointed to previous court findings involving political figures and argued that courts have already provided guidance on what “fit and proper” means.

ANC chief whip Mdumiseni Ntuli urged members to focus on the rules rather than individual politicians.

“We deal with the rules as a matter of principle and not associate with an individual,” said Ntuli.

National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza said there was broad agreement on the principle but not on what the phrase actually means.

“It is not clear who makes that determination,” she said.

Didiza ordered Parliament’s Rules Subcommittee and legal advisers to return with a clearer definition before the matter can move forward.

The Speaker also confirmed that President Ramaphosa will have the right to be heard and represented by a lawyer during the impeachment process.

She said the impeachment committee’s work can continue while Parliament finalises the outstanding rule changes.

Pictured above: President Cyril Ramaphosa

Image source: File