The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are set to return to court just days before the State of the Nation (Sona) address, in a bid to challenge the parliamentary sanctions imposed on its senior leaders, The Times Post has learned.
The Western Cape High Court recently dismissed the EFF’s application to suspend disciplinary measures against Julius Malema, Floyd Shivambu, and others who disrupted last year’s Sona. The party argues that these sanctions are an attempt to silence those holding President Cyril Ramaphosa accountable.
On an urgent basis, the EFF will argue that its senior leaders should be allowed to attend the Sona on Thursday. The party believes that the decision by the National Assembly to suspend them for February denies over one million voters the representation they deserve during this important event.
[ ANC’s Confidence Grows As Election Approaches With Ramaphosa Saying He Smells Victory ]
However, Parliament’s legal advisor, Zuraya Adhikarie, has stated that the suspension cannot be delayed as the current parliamentary term is nearing its end.
If the EFF’s urgent application fails, its senior leaders will not be able to attend the Sona. Nevertheless, the party has another ongoing matter before the court regarding the House rules.
The EFF argues that these rules, adopted late last year for joint sittings of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces (NCOP), infringe upon their freedom to protest and freedom of speech. The new rules prohibit disruptions during President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Sona address.
The EFF’s ongoing legal battles highlight the tension between the party and Parliament, as well as the broader issue of balancing the right to protest with the need for order and decorum within the legislative process.
While the EFF’s disruptive behaviour during previous Sonas has drawn criticism, the party contends that it is exercising its democratic right to hold the President accountable.
Parliamentary sanctions play a crucial role in maintaining discipline and order within the legislative body. The EFF’s argument that these sanctions are an attempt to silence dissent raises important questions about the balance between accountability and the effective functioning of Parliament.
Critics argue that disruptive behaviour undermines the integrity of parliamentary proceedings and hampers the government’s ability to communicate its policies and plans effectively.
On the other hand, supporters of the EFF argue that disruptive protests are a legitimate form of political expression, particularly in a country with a history of struggle against oppression. They believe that the EFF’s actions serve as a necessary reminder that the government should be held accountable to the people it represents.
Catch up with the latest news from The Times Post on WhatsApp by following our channel. Click here to join.
