No impeachment for Ramaphosa, but is he out of the woods?

So there we have it. 

214 against the adoption of the report and 148 for it. 

Despite all the noise made by Mervyn Dirks in the media that there were more than 40 ANC MPs willing to break rank and vote for the adoption of the Expert Panel’s Phala Phala report, only 5 ANC MPs voted with the opposition. I am tempted to say: “I could have told you that”, but I won’t. 

The debate itself was fairly civilized as far as parliamentary debates go.  

Predictably the EFF made a few points of order, but the Speaker was clearly more in control of the process and even reminded the EFF that  - like them - she was also a fighter and not easily intimidated. So they quickly gave up and the debate proceeded. 

The ANC was subdued. This was not an easy debate for the rank and file to sit through – as it could not have been for the President, who was not present. 

The opposition lambasted both him and his party. Malema called the President a Constitutional delinquent, saying that he is now the greatest enemy of accountability. He even suggested that he was urinating on the Constitution. Of course, it wouldn’t be a debate if Malema didn’t throw in a few references to White Monopoly Capital. 

John Steenhuisen accused the ANC of abusing their majority, which made me wonder if the DA would have acted differently if they were the majority party or in the Western Cape legislature under similar circumstances. I doubt it. 

The real drama came at the end of the debate when the DA called for a division. Given that electronic voting is not possible after the fire earlier this year, the Speaker ruled that every MP’s name would be called out and that they had to say yes or no to whether the report should be adopted. The opposition objected and threatened legal action.  The Speaker gave them time to talk and then continued. 

For the first time since 1994, every MP had to stand up and individually declare their position on a matter. Starting with the ANC, an almost soothing rhythm of “No”, “No”,  “No” could be heard – that was until Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma’s name was called out. “As a disciplined member of the ANC, I vote yes” she declared. She spoke fast as if to get it out as quickly as possible. All hell broke loose. All the EFF MPs jumped up and cheered loudly. ANC members were visibly shocked.

When the Speaker finally restored order the rhythm of nos resumed with Pravin Gordhan, who was seated next to Dlamini Zuma, pointedly declaring: “As a disciplined member of the ANC, I vote no.”

Unsurprisingly there were a few more “Yesses” from Mosebenzi Zwane, Mervin Dirks, Supra Mahumapelo and Thandiwe Zwane. 

Some ANC MPs were notably absent. Lindiwe Sisulu who had earlier been in her seat during the debate was no longer in the House. Also absent was Zweli Mkhize. I don’t know how they would have voted, but suspect that they wanted to vote yes. We will of course never know, but if that was indeed the case, they were cowards for not being there and leaving it to other more junior MPs to do their dirty work.

The opposition with a few exceptions voted yes, but of course with the ANC majority the vote ended with a resounding no. 

So what now? 
Unless the opposition can convince the courts that there was a problem with the voting mechanism, this is the end of the road for these impeachment proceedings against the president in parliament.

Was the debate a big waste of time and resources? 

As entertaining as it was, I’m inclined to say yes. Given that the President has filed papers with the Constitutional Court to declare the report invalid, it seems rather bizarre that they debated and voted on it, before the court had ruled on the matter. Surely, it would have made more sense to have waited for the court case to have concluded – a point also made by Good Party’s Brett Herron. 

The ANC of course wanted to put an end to the parliamentary drama before their elective conference at the end of the week. However, it has baffled me why the Speaker did not allow an extension to the expert panel to complete their work until next year. When asked for an extension, she could have rightly indicated that parliament would be in recess and that the debate and report must therefore stand over till next year.  For whatever reasons she decided not to.  

Frustratingly, the President continues to follow - in my opinion- bad advice not to clarify the matter once and for all. So, after all the drama and more currency weakening we are none the wiser about the Phala Phala matter and will  have to wait for the reports by the Hawks, SARS and SARB next year.

In the meantime, this vote almost certainly paves the way for a Ramaphosa victory at the end of the week at the ANC’s conference, since if today was anything to go by, the RET faction has significantly lost power in the party.

Of course, the big question then remains how long Ramaphosa will remain president. If any serious adverse findings are made by the HAWKS, SARS or SARB, the mood in parliament could change quickly. 

So he is not out of the woods yet…