Ramaphosa fights for rights to reshuffle cabinet at will
President also asks high court to dismiss DA challenge of decision to keep Dlamini
President Cyril Ramaphosa will this morning fight a court ruling that could be used to force him to disclose his reasons for cabinet reshuffles. Ramaphosa will simultaneously come under fire for using his “political judgement” to defend his decision not to fire minister Bathabile Dlamini. The president’s lawyers have turned to the Constitutional Court to seek to overturn an appeal court ruling concerning his predecessor Jacob Zuma’s controversial decision to fire former finance minister Pravin Gordhan and his deputy Mcebisi Jonas.
The DA won the application in both the high and appeal courts, but Ramaphosa is hoping to convince the highest court that the president should not be expected to explain his reasons for cabinet reshuffles, by providing a so-called “Rule 53” record of whatever informed his decisions to hire and fire ministers. Simultaneously, the president has asked the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria not to even hear a separate court bid by the DA to challenge his decision not to fire Dlamini, despite the damning findings made against her by the Constitutional Court. “Decisions as to whom to appoint and to retain in the cabinet are decisions of an essentially political nature, which, I respectfully submit, are not matters that are appropriately to be debated in court.” He maintained that his decision to retain her as a minister was not made “in bad faith or under duress”.
He added that he was advised that the findings made against Dlamini in connection with her handling of the South African Social Services Agency grants payment crisis, while she was social development minister, “do not disqualify her from continued membership in the cabinet”. The DA maintained that the advice given to Ramaphosa was wrong, and that the findings made against Dlamini render her unsuitable to serve as a minister.
In February last year, the Constitutional Court described Dlamini’s conduct as “reckless and grossly negligent”‚ saying she failed to disclose information before a court-ordered inquiry into her role in the social grants debacle, which was led by retired judge Bernard Ngoepe. Ngoepe described Dlamini as “evasive” in her responses, and would “answer questions with questions”.
The president has also questioned why the DA went straight to court to challenge his decision to retain Dlamini, a long-time Zuma loyalist, instead of questioning him about that decision in parliament. He further argued that, if the party was intent on removing Dlamini, it could have bought a motion of no confidence in his entire cabinet.