THE DA has started a parliamentary process to remove President Jacob Zuma from office because of the way President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan was allowed to leave the country earlier this year in violation of a court order.
Al-Bashir was allowed to leave Waterkloof Air Force Base and return to South Sudan despite an order by the North Gauteng High Court instructing the government to keep him from doing so.
Yesterday, DA leader Mmusi Maimane claimed that Zuma had acted in violation of the constitution by disregarding the rule of law.
The DA says this calls for the impeachment of the president.
No process of impeachment
is defined in the constitution, but DA spokesman Mabine Seabe claimed yesterday that the term “impeachment” was synonymous with the process of “removing the president” as defined in Section 89 of the constitution.
The section states that the National Assembly, by a resolution adopted with a supporting vote of at least twothirds of its members, may remove the president from office only on the grounds of:
- A serious violation of the constitution or the law;
- Serious misconduct; or
- Inability to perform the functions of office.
Maimane claims that impeachment is different from a vote of no confidence, which is governed by Section 102 of the constitution. Only one motion of no confidence can be brought every year, and the DA has already brought a motion of no confidence in Zuma in the past year.
The DA will ask that its motion be debated in the house on August 18, whereupon a vote by a third of the house will be required to establish an ad hoc committee to investigate the impeachment charge.
But the ANC says the DA’s impeachment efforts are just a cheap publicity stunt.
“As we have repeatedly stated, all heads of states and delegates who attended the African Union summit in Sandton were granted diplomatic immunity by the government in line with international standards and practices.”
-Jan-Jan Joubert
The post DA drive to have Zuma removed from office appeared first on HeraldLIVE.