Pretoria - Some pronouncements by the ANC electoral committee, including curtailing the number of nominees for each official (the Top Six), constitute brazen and troubling overreach.
Former ANC deputy president and its head of the electoral committee, Kgalema Motlanthe, has outlined the rules that will govern nominations and elections leading up to and including the national conference in December, announcing that “provincial nominations will be consolidated from the branches for each province”.
That list will “then be used to determine the top three nominees nationally for each official position and top 200 additional member nominees”. This determination constitutes either desperation by an National Executive Committee (NEC) sub-committee to punch above its weight, or incompetence and dereliction of duty by the NEC.
They are acting ultra vires, and simply unconstitutionally. If the NEC was worth its name, it was supposed to have discarded or amended this outlandish rule to avoid unnecessary tensions and even the proverbial blood flowing on the conference floor.
Moving from the premise that all ANC members cherish the supremacy of their organisation’s constitution, we should be alarmed by this inexplicable but flagrant violation of our rights as members in good standing.
But what are the relevant ANC’s constitutional provisions?
SubRule 5.1.4 under “Rights and Duties of Members” provides for members to “take part in elections and be elected or appointed to any committee, structure, commission or delegation of the ANC”. This right is not qualified or encumbered in any manner whatsoever. Therefore, the NEC, let alone the electoral committee, has no right to limit or repurpose it unless they unequivocally demonstrate where they derive that sweeping power from. Anything else amounts to constitutional delinquency.
The ANC constitution also outlines the procedures of nominations to the NEC as per Rule 12.7, stating how candidates for officials and additional member positions end up on the ballot paper. This includes those nominated from the conference floor with the proviso they meet the 25% threshold.
In simple terms, the conference is the final arbiter on who can and cannot stand for election as per the provisions of the ANC constitution.
Therefore, no one, let alone a sub-committee, has the power to arbitrarily amend the ANC constitution, except delegates at a properly constituted national or special conference where those amendments were proposed at least three months prior to that gathering.
The electoral committee is only mandated to “make rules and manage selection of candidates for ANC leadership and public representatives positions”. It gives effect to resolutions aimed at addressing weaknesses and manipulation of selection processes and also develops rules that will, hopefully, deliver candidates and leaders with the requisite “capacity, integrity and support needed to lead the ANC and government”.
It has to be emphasised that the electoral committee has to undertake its work strictly within the provisions of the ANC constitution; any deviation can only lead to uncalled for conflict including legal challenges, and this has to be avoided at all and any cost.
In the event that the number for each position is restricted to three out of whatever number as nominated by branches and structures, who has legitimate powers to determine which three go on to the ballot box?
And how do you reconcile that with the constitutional provisions of allowing nominations from the conference floor? This is a legal minefield.
To redeem itself, it is incumbent upon the ANC, at the very least, to convene a conference devoid of drama including court challenges and violence. South Africans deserve better from their party that considers itself the leader of society.
Pretoria News