The Democratic Alliance (DA) says it has begun the process to impeach president Jacob Zuma, following a judgement by the Constitutional Court on Nkandla.<\/p>\n
The Constitutional Court \u2013 the highest court in the land \u2013 found that President Jacob Zuma failed to uphold, defend and respect the Constitution as the supreme law of the land by disregarding a report by the Public Protector on his homestead.<\/p>\n
The DA said on Friday that the ConCourt’s ruling This amounts to a serious violation of the constitution and the law and satisfies section 89(1) (a) of the constitution, which provides for the impeachment of the president.<\/p>\n
The constitution of the Republic of South Africa is quite clear on the circumstance of the removal from office, the president or executive deputy president.<\/p>\n
Section 89(1) of the constitution states: Removal of President<\/strong><\/p>\n The National Assembly, by a resolution adopted with a supporting vote of at least two thirds of its members, may remove the President from office only on the grounds of \u2013<\/p>\n (a) a serious violation of the constitution or the law; “The process of impeachment is not one that the people of South Africa should take lightly. It should be reserved for the most serious cases of improper conduct or unlawful conduct by the head of state. It should be used to send a message to the president and the people of South Africa that abuse of the constitution \u2013 which the president has sworn an oath to uphold and protect \u2013 will not be tolerated,” said DA leader, Mmusi Maimane.<\/p>\n The DA noted that Parliament’s conduct was also under scrutiny in Thursday’s scathing judgment. It called on the Speaker of the National Assembly, Baleka Mbete, “to stand aside and resign”.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The DA has been down the same path before, and failed, in September. The political party blamed Zuma for allowing\u00a0Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir\u00a0to leave the country, despite the North Gauteng High Court ordering that he remain.<\/p>\n The motion to impeach Zuma was rejected, with 211 MPs voting against it, 100 for it and 17 abstentions.<\/p>\n In March, the DA also failed to push a vote of no confidence in president Zuma.<\/p>\n A vote of no confidence brought in March 2015 saw 221 MPs oppose the motion, with 113 supporting and 8 abstaining.<\/p>\n In the same vote a year later, Zuma garnered even more support, with 225 members opposing the motion, with only 99 supporting. 22 MPs abstained, including all EFF members, who elected to not participate.<\/p>\n The ANC has continued to stand firm behind its president, despite numerous controversies which members say have tarnished the party’s reputation.<\/p>\n On Thursday,ANC secretary general, Gwede Mantashe, said that the party’s ‘Top six’ officials would hold a crisis meeting to discuss the ConCourt’s ruling.<\/p>\n ANC rallies behind Zuma in vote of no confidence<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n DA moves to impeach Zuma following ConCourt ruling<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Zuma violated the constitution: ConCourt<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
\n(b) serious misconduct; or
\n(c) inability to perform the functions of office.<\/p>\nAnother attempt to knock Zuma down<\/h3>\n
More on Nkandla<\/h3>\n