IEC has no powers to disqualify Zuma as election candidate — Mpofu

It was the National Assembly that had a right to debate the eligibility of members and the Electoral Commission had no authority to disqualify MK Party leader Jacob Zuma from being on the ballots on May 29, advocate Dali Mpofu SC for Zuma told the Constitutional Court on Friday. 

The apex court heard the application by the IEC to appeal against the Electoral Court’s ruling which found that Zuma was eligible to be in parliament. 

The IEC had decided that due to Zuma’s 15-month prison sentence imposed when the apex court had found him in contempt for refusing to testify in the commission of inquiry into state capture, he was not eligible to be an election candidate.

It had based its finding on section 47 of the Electoral Act which prohibited anyone handed a 12-month or longer sentence from being a member of parliament.

Arguing for Zuma, Mpofu said it was not for the IEC to decide but for the National Assembly to debate in line with provisions in the constitution.,

“The constitution says that the National Assembly may determine and control its own orders and its business with due regard to its representatives. The real separation of powers is this one ... It is where an institution of democracy such as the IEC can ever have the power to intrude into the exclusive domain of the National Assembly when it doesn’t have the authority to do so.

“The first sitting of the National Assembly must swear in its members, elect the speaker and the deputy speaker and then elect a president,” Mpofu said.

Justice Stevan Majiedt questioned Mpofu’s argument, asking him if he has ever seen the National Assembly determining the eligibility of an election candidate.

Mpofu used the example of the late former Tshwane mayor Murunwa Makwarela who was removed as mayor after it was found that he was declared insolvent.

“The Tshwane council did not go to the IEC for that but determined his eligibility and he was taken out of his mayorship. If you do something there and they want to kick you out even if it’s for the day, they will.”

The IEC argued that Zuma was not eligible to stand for parliament, stating the remission of his sentence did not hold ground.

According to IEC’s legal representative advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, the remission only reduced the length of the sentencing while section 47(3) of the Electoral Act does not include remissions and pardons.

“We argue that the Electoral Court fundamentally erred when it held that an impact of a remission is a reduction of a sentence. That is not borne out by the text, it is not borne out by history and it is not borne out of the purpose of this section.”

Judgment was reserved. 

TimesLIVE