President Zuma’s removal as the leader of South Africa has been the desire of many South Africans. This time, opposition parties for the first time, united to oust Zuma.
Now, it has emerged that the agitation to remove Daddy Zuma as the President of South Africa has possibly, been intensified by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).
BuzzSouthAfrica confirmed that the EFF has joined the UDM (United Democratic Movement) to file a Constitutional Court application asking for a secret ballot in the vote of the motion of no confidence in President Zuma.
When UDM approached the Constitutional Court for a secret ballot, its President, Bantu Holomisa pointed out that a secret ballot would enable ANC MPs carry out this duty without fear of reprisals and removals.
“Ultimately, we want to deal with this culture of intimidation. We have lost a secretary-general in the past due to intimation. We do not want this to be acceptable behavior in South African politics. The African National Congress is known for intimidation and we want to deal with it decisively,” Holomisa stated.
As it happened, President Zuma filed an affidavit opposing UDM’s application contending that it’s constitutional to have an open ballot for the motion of no confidence.
Following UDM’s lead, EFF expressed that its quest for a secrete ballot follows President Zuma’s move to block it.
“This is following Zuma’s own opposing papers in which he essentially, in a morally degenerate move, opposes the granting of a secret ballot that will be concerned with him.
“Zuma has opened a way for the EFF because we reject and despise the self-centered and selfish way in which he wants to dictate how MPs should express their confidence or none-thereof in him.
“When he launched opposing papers of a motion that will be about him he declared war against the very freedom we believe the secret ballot seeks to protect.
“How lowly must a leader in a democratic society be that like Zuma, he wants to hold on to power at all costs,” stated the fighters.
Acknowledging that Zuma represents the executive organ of the state, EFF argued that the President ought to have allowed parliament to resolve its internal processes with the guidance of the courts about how to handle a motion of no confidence in him as a president.