Daily Dispatch
Zuma’s power not unlimited
THE word “prerogative” has been bandied about with almost casual abandon amid the hurly-burly of President Jacob Zuma’s cabinet reshuffle.
As we all know, the reshuffle was more about purging the cabinet of Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan and deputy Mcebisi Jonas, and others critical of Zuma. It had little to do with performance – in fact at least one minister whose performance has been condemned in the strongest possible terms by the Constitutional Court, was not axed.
While expressing displeasure from disagreement to outrage, almost all critics shrug and say: “Well, it’s the president’s prerogative to hire and fire ministers”.
It is a subtle and dangerous misuse of the word and complete abuse of what our Constitution stands for. The idea that the president attains some sort of absolute ownership over cabinet ministers and can act however he likes is simply false.
To start with, the word “prerogative” (which correctly means the right to exercise a power or responsibility) does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, and nowhere does it give the president unfettered autocratic dictatorship of the executive. In fact, ministers are not accountable to the president – they are accountable to parliament.
And it is this concept of “accountability” that seems to be overlooked. It is a central tenet of our Constitution and among the values and principles that run through it like golden threads.
The rock on which the Constitution rests is the ideal of a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people, that every citizen is equally protected by law, and that government improves the quality of life for all citizens and frees the potential of each person.
The Constitution is also crystal clear that all spheres of government must provide effective, transparent, accountable and coherent government, and not assume any power or function except those conferred in terms of the Constitution.
The different spheres of government must also not encroach on the functions or institutional integrity of government in another sphere, but must co-operate in mutual trust and good faith “by informing one another of, and consulting one another on, matters of common interest”.
While the president is charged with appointing the cabinet and assigning responsibilities, the cabinet is “accountable collectively and individually to parliament for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions”.
A midnight reshuffle that has such massive repercussions on the lives of all citizens and taken without any consultation with parliament is not within the values and principles of the Constitution.
Parliament has to convene urgently at the earliest possibility to hold the president accountable for the changes. They may vote either on a motion of no confidence in the cabinet – in which case the president must reconstitute the cabinet, or in the president himself.
If the cabinet is removed by a vote of no confidence, the president should, by all accounts, resign.