DA to take parliament to court over failure to find venues after the fire

The DA says it will challenge parliament’s decision to not find suitable venues after a fire gutted two of its main buildings in January.

DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube noted it has been more than 10 months since the fire and that, besides the criminal investigation, little to no work has been done to investigate and hold people to account.

She said parliament should have made greater headway in ensuring all bases have been covered.

“Additionally, progress should have been made in finding suitable alternative venues for parliament and its committees to convene,” she said.

Parliament has been holding hybrid meetings with a few MPs attending its sittings in person while the majority connect virtually.

Gwarube said the Good Hope chamber, which can only accommodate 120 of the National Assembly’s 400 members and which has been a stop-gap measure, cannot be the way parliament conducts its business. Of the DA’s 84 members in the assembly, only 19 are accommodated as the official opposition. The numbers are less for other political parties.

She said many committees — meant to be the engine room for the business of parliament — meet online, which is less than optimal and is exclusionary to most South Africans who wish to follow parliament’s work.

“This is why we have referred parliament’s refusal to find alternative venues for the institution — while the rebuilding is set to commence — to our lawyers for review and challenging.

“We believe this decision contravenes sections 59 and 72 of the constitution, which forces both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces — respectively — to facilitate public involvement in the processes of the assembly, committees and conduct its business in a manner that is accessible to the public.”

Gwarube said National Assembly rules entrust the speaker with the responsibility to ensure public access and participation in the business of parliament.

“We have given this process almost a year; it is clear the ANC is only too happy to have parliament’s oversight mechanisms hamstrung. That is why we will seek to approach the courts.”

It is expected it will take at least three years to complete the restoration of affected buildings.

In his medium-term budget policy statement last month, finance minister Enoch Godongwana announced that the legislature will receive R2bn to restore its buildings.

Parliament announced last month it was launching an investigation into the security breach that led to the fire. 

Meanwhile, DA leader John Steenhuisen has indicated that should the section 89 panel not recommend impeachment against President Cyril Ramaphosa, his party will insist on the establishment of an ad hoc committee to investigate the Phala Phala saga.

Steenhuisen said the scope of a section 89 inquiry is far narrower than an ad hoc committee’s job.

“An ad hoc committee can inquire into a full range of issues, (while) all the section 89 inquiry is tasked with doing is seeing whether there is a prima facie case for a process of impeachment,” he said.

“I think it’s very difficult to make a prima facie case. I think the bar is far higher than it would be for an ad hoc committee to make a finding.

“Because in the absence of a final report from the public protector, in the absence of a final report from the SA Reserve Bank, Sars, Ipid or whoever is tasked with investigating the conduct of Wally Rhoode, I suspect it is going to be incredibly difficult for the section 89 committee to say there is a prima facie case to answer.

“I may be pleasantly surprised, I may be wrong, but I suspect they are going to come back and say, ‘Yes, these are serious allegations, but at this point in time, they remain allegations that are untested and therefore there is no prima facie case at this stage to warrant that’.”

TimesLIVE