Motsoaledi lays into MPs’ choices

• Home affairs committee is weighing whether parliament should help to appoint a panel to probe electoral reform

The exercise by parliament of its power to appoint people to statutory bodies has not necessarily resulted in the appointment of exceptional individuals, home affairs minister Aaron Motsoaledi said on Thursday. He referred to the role of parliament in appointing former members of the SABC board who were not of good quality and oversaw the deterioration of the stateowned broadcaster.

The exercise by parliament of its power to appoint people to statutory bodies has not necessarily resulted in the appointment of exceptional individuals, home affairs minister Aaron Motsoaledi said on Thursday.

He referred to the role of parliament in appointing former members of the SABC board who were not of good quality and oversaw the deterioration of the state-owned broadcaster.

Parliament’s home affairs portfolio committee is considering whether parliament should have a role in the appointment of a panel to investigate comprehensive electoral reform, including a constituency-based system. The panel will be appointed after the enactment of the Electoral Amendment Bill and submit a report 12 months after the 2024 elections so that the required reforms can be done before the 2029 elections.

The bill enables individual candidates to contest national and provincial elections in accordance with a Constitutional Court judgment that their exclusion is unconstitutional. As adopted by the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces (NCOP), it provides that the minister in consultation with the Electoral Commission of SA) will be responsible for the appointment within the framework stipulated in the bill.

But public comments on the bill sought by the home affairs committee after amendments made by the NCOP stressed the importance of parliament having a say in the appointment of the panel. They questioned whether the panel would be independent of the executive if appointed by the minister.

Motsoaledi noted in comments made at Thursday’s committee meeting that the issue of parliament’s role in appointments rather than ministers being empowered with this, is a perennial one that he suspected arises from a lack of trust. There is no guarantee that parliamentary appointments will result in quality, as happened with SABC board appointments.

Motsoaledi’s legal counsel, Steven Budlender and Mitchell de Beer, pointed out in a memorandum to the committee that the minister’s power to appoint the panel will not be unfettered. The bill stipulates the required qualifications of the panel members who will be appointed from a list of publicly nominated individuals, and requires the minister to consult with the Election Commission of SA.

“In our view, there are good reasons for the minister to appoint the panel. He will be responsible for introducing any bill into parliament to undertake further reforms of the electoral system once the panel has done its work. His department can also provide administrative support to the panel.

“As to the panel’s independence, there is nothing constitutionally problematic with a member of the executive appointing persons to an independent body. This is especially so as the provision does not give the minister a free hand in appointing members of the panel,” the memorandum said.

The minister’s authority to remove members of the panel is also circumscribed, as it requires a finding of misconduct, incapacity or incompetence.

DA MP Adrian Roos and IFP MP Liezl van der Merwe said parliament should have role in appointing the panel.

Another issue the committee is dealing with is the number of signatures required for an independent candidate to be eligible to contest an election. In the version of the bill passed initially by the National Assembly, a previously unelected independent candidate or political party would require the signatures of voters totalling at least 20% of the quota in the last election, currently equal to about 8,000 signatures.

Budlender and Mitchell said they believe the 20% eligibility requirement strikes the right balance between the competing interests but added that the committee could consider reducing it to 15%.

Public comments about this issue were that the threshold is too high and would act as a barrier to entry for independent candidates. The Council for the Advancement of the SA Constitution (Casac) proposed that the requirement should be at least 1,000 signatures. Van der Merwe supported a 15% signature threshold.

IEC CEO Sy Mamabolo dismissed public criticism about the bill’s calculation of seat allocation, stressing that independent candidates and political parties are treated in the same way. He also justified the provision that independent candidates winning a seat in several regions would be allocated a seat in the region in which they obtained the highest proportion of votes rather than the highest number of votes.

Mamabolo rejected the argument that a seat left vacant by an independent candidate should be allocated to another independent candidate, saying the allocation would be made on the basis of a calculation.

The committee will deliberate on possible amendments to the bill on Tuesday. Motsoaledi urged it not to engage in a further public consultation process, which might jeopardise compliance with the February 28 extension granted by the Constitutional Court for the bill to be on the statute books. The Electoral Commission of SA has similar concerns.

Roos said the DA continues to oppose the bill as it undermines the principle of general proportionality and favours the ANC.