‘We will respect the court’
THE ANC yesterday dodged an attachment order of assets worth R300000 from its Luthuli House headquarters after reaching an “amicable” agreement with the city of Johannesburg.
This after Johannesburg mayor Herman Mashaba vowed to attach property at the governing party’s headquarters owing to its failure to pay more than R300 000 in legal fees after the city obtained a writ of execution against the ANC.
ANC regional spokesperson Jolidee Matongo said the party met with lawyers representing the city and that an agreement was reached.
“(On June 12) we learnt we were required to provide the city’s lawyers with a settlement proposal on or before June 15, after the mayor made a public statement on the matter.
“We immediately met with the city’s lawyers to reach an amicable conclusion on the matter,” he said.
“Should the ANC fail to honour this payment by Friday the City has instructed its lawyers to proceed with execution of the court order, which will result in R300 000 worth of property being seized from ANC headquarters, Luthuli House,” Mashaba said.
However, Matongo said the ANC did not know about the need to settle with the city’s lawyers. “We would have settled the taxed bill of costs as soon as we were advised by our lawyers to do so. Our application was merely struck off the rill due to a lack of urgency. The ANC Caucus in Johannesburg wishes to place it on record that we will always respect our courts,” Matongo said. REFLECTING on the first six months of the Parliament calendar, ANC chief whip Jackson Mthembu vehemently denied the party was following an EFF agenda and also labelled as incitement that party’s call for land to be occupied.
He also praised President Cyril Ramaphosa for the manner in which he has restored trust and carried himself in office since taking over from Jacob Zuma in February.
Deputy President David Mabuza also earned a plus mark from Mthembu.
Asked about the EFF using a National Assembly sitting to encourage supporters to occupy land, he said: “Can I under the guise of freedom expression call for a criminal act to be undertaken? We don’t think so.”
He told a media briefing Parliament must look at whether a Chamber can be used to “incite people to call for action that is illegal. Can all that be construed to fall under freedom of expression? My view is ‘No’”. “This is criminal conduct and that’s my view. It’s calling on the