{"id":52220,"date":"2016-04-03T00:05:35","date_gmt":"2016-04-02T22:05:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arabtelegraph.com\/?p=52220"},"modified":"2016-04-03T00:05:35","modified_gmt":"2016-04-02T22:05:35","slug":"zuma-impeachment-debate-will-go-ahead","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arabtelegraph.com\/?p=52220","title":{"rendered":"Zuma impeachment debate will go ahead"},"content":{"rendered":"

The National Assembly will debate a motion on Tuesday calling for the removal of President Jacob Zuma from office.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The motion was tabled by DA leader Mmusi Maimane through a letter to National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete on Thursday just minutes after the Constitutional Court ruled that Zuma violated his oath of office and failed to uphold and defend the Constitution of the republic.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Maimane requested that Mbete consider his request to have the motion calling for the removal of the president debated by MPs.\u00a0Mbete\u2019s spokesperson, Mandlakazi Sigcawu confirmed this afternoon that the debate would indeed go ahead on Tuesday.<\/p>\n

It will be the first time in the history of a democratic South Africa that a motion to remove a president is debated.<\/p>\n

In the past, MPs have debated motions of no confidence in the president, which are political statements. But the motion to remove a president is provided for in the Constitution and is considered on the grounds of a serious violation of the Constitution or the law, serious misconduct or the inability to perform the functions of office.<\/p>\n

MPs will vote at the end of the debate and the majority vote will carry.\u00a0Two-thirds (267) of the National Assembly\u2019s 400 MPs will have to vote for the impeachment for it to carry.<\/p>\n

In his letter to Mbete, Maimane said he was writing in light of the Constitutional Court ruling in the Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v the Speaker of National Assembly and Others and the Democratic Alliance and Others v the Speaker of the National Assembly and Others\u2019 case, which confirmed the legal principle that, absent a judicial review, the Public Protector\u2019s findings and remedial actions were binding and had to be implemented.<\/p>\n

\n

Maimane: Nobody's above the law, certainly not the constitution.If I was [Zuma] I'd be drafting a resignation letter pic.twitter.com\/u3qv975uV9<\/a><\/p>\n

— City Press (@City_Press) March 31, 2016<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n