Parties Divided Over Madonsela Role In Ramaphosa Impeachment Process

Political parties have disagreed over the suitability of Advocate Thandazani Madonsela to serve as evidence leader in the impeachment process involving President Cyril Ramaphosa, after questions were raised about his previous legal work for the African National Congress (ANC).

Ramaphosa is facing an impeachment process over his conduct following the theft of US dollars from his Phala Phala farm in 2020. Opposition parties argued that Madonsela’s provision of legal support to the ANC was known before his recommendation for the role.

ANC MP Cameron Dugmore disputed the characterisation of the arrangement, saying Madonsela’s advice had been provided to the ANC’s head office rather than to a parliamentary study group, as suggested by correspondence from the advocate.

The issue divided parties during deliberations over the appointment.

Parties Differ Over Potential Conflict

uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) parliamentary leader John Hlophe defended Madonsela’s integrity and rejected the suggestion that objections linked to his relationship with Ramaphosa should disqualify him.

Hlophe referred to the fact that Madonsela continued to undertake work for the ANC, but said his party nevertheless supported his appointment.

“If anyone should be objecting, it is us who should be objecting, on the basis that he continues to do work for the ANC, but we believe in him,” Hlophe said.

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), ActionSA, Build One South Africa (Bosa), the African Transformation Movement (ATM) and the United Africans Transformation (UAT) also supported Madonsela’s appointment.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Parliament Legal Department Finds No Grounds For Ramaphosa Objection To Madonsela

The Democratic Alliance (DA), however, called for the appointment to be reconsidered.

DA MP Glynnis Breytenbach said MPs should take into account how the proceedings could be perceived by members of the public they represent.

“To avoid any possible doubts about the fairness, integrity and objectivity of these proceedings, and while we have time to deal with this issue responsibly, we support the view that the appointment should be revisited,” Breytenbach said.

Committee Orders Fresh Nomination Process

The committee ultimately voted 18-9 to restart the appointment process.

The decision means political parties will have another opportunity to nominate candidates for the evidence leader position.

Parties have been given until the end of the week to submit fresh nominations.

The dispute over Madonsela centres on the potential perception of a conflict of interest, rather than an established finding that his previous work for the ANC prevents him from serving in the impeachment proceedings.