Parliament agrees to Mkwhebane Inquiry 275-40 with four parties voting against

The big news today has been that the motion to hold an inquiry into Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold the office of Public Protector. The motion passed despite a request to postpone the debate until after a pending court challenge.

Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s inquiry

Vote breakdown

Speaker Thandi Modise said in the National Assembly:

“I must also indicate that I have received correspondence which requests that the House suspends its consideration of the report in light of the pending court challenge against the validity of the rules and the fact that any deliberations thereon would impinge on the National Assembly role, matters sub judice”.

Despite this, the vote proceeded with a resounding majority of 275 votes favouring the inquiry into the Public Protector.

The DA initially brought the motion. An independent panel has since found prima facie evidence to suggest Mkwhebane’s incompetence and or misconduct in her role as public protector.

ANC’s surprise vote

DA chief whip Natasha Mazzone urged her fellow members of parliament to support the motion to institute the inquiry into Mkhwebane’s competence to hold office. Mazzone added:

“It is important for us to remember that South Africans look to us and our Chapter 9 institutions to maintain the security, the sovereignty, and the respect that our Constitution and our Bill of Rights have. And therefore, it was by order of the court that rules were established – which we followed as members of parliament – to make sure any motion that came before the House would be just and done in the correct fashion.”

The vote is something of a departure for the ANC, who have previously voted against the DA’s motions on principle.

“The results of the division is as follows: The ayes – 275. The no’s 40. And we have one abstention. The question is, therefore, accordingly agreed to,” said Modise.

Support for Mkhwebane

Mkhwebane was not without support in parliament, though with Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) MP Natasha Ntlangwini questioning urgency to institute an inquiry.

“But because her name and her skin is black now all of a sudden rules and an independent panel must be established because she is black. We will take you to court.”

The UDM, Al Jama-ah and ATM all also opposed the motion, with COPE abstaining from the vote.

Now read: Fikile Mbalula apologises to NDZ over Twitter rant, snubs Mkhwebane