Breaking: ATM request delay of Ramaphosa’s no confidence vote
The African Transformation Movement (ATM) have confirmed that they have requested Speaker Thandie Modise to postpone the vote of no confidence set on the agenda against President Cyril Ramaphosa while they await the outcome of their court application to ensure that voting is done via secret ballot.
Support for the motion that they filed back in February – prior to the emergence of COVID-19 and subsequent lockdowns – appears to be thin, with the Democratic Alliance (DA) and United Democratic Movement (UDM) already having indicated that they will vote against it.
ATM request delay of motion of no confidence against Ramaphosa
Ahead of the debate set to take place at noon on Thursday 3 December, the ATM confirmed that they have appealed to the Speaker to hold off on the debate.
“I, Vuyolwethu Zungula, on behalf of he African Transformation Movement (ATM) hereby advise the Speaker to postpone the sitting scheduled for 3 December in respect of the motion of no conidence against President Cyril Ramaphosa,” the Party said in a statement.
“The basis of asking for postponement is that the ATM has launched proceedings before the Western Cape High Court, wherein the ATM seeks the court to review, and set aside the decision by the speaker to decline a vote by secret ballot.”
These court proceedings will be heard on 3 and 4 February 2021, and are
Parliament deny secret ballot
On Wednesday, Modise declined to allow the ballot to be held in secret, with Parliamentary spokesperson Moloto Mothapo that unless the atmosphere in Parliament is “highly charged or toxic”, then the vote should proceed out in the open.
“The ATM has not offered proof of a highly charged atmosphere, intimidation of any member, or any demonstrable evidence of threats against the lives of members and their families, which may warrant a secret ballot,” Mothapo said in a statement.
“As public representatives of the electorate, members are not supposed to always operate under a veil of secrecy. Considerations of transparency and openness sometimes demand a display, as the Constitutional Court asserted, of ‘courage and resoluteness to boldly advance the best interests of those the members of the National Assembly represent, no matter the consequences, including the risk of dismissal for non-compliance with the party’s instructions’.”
