The supreme law of the land – the Constitution – is essentially a set of norms which regulate the relationship between the State, citizens, and a number of institutions that support and further democracy. The fundamental ‘rules of engagement’, so to speak.

The supremacy of the Constitution is captured in its own Chapter 1(2), where it is stated that “This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic; law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid, and obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled.”

With this in mind, it necessitates reflection on the debate around the role and powers which the Constitution, as the supreme law, affords the Public Protector and other Chapter 9 institutions or “State institutions supporting constitutional democracy”, as the Constitution calls them.

Section 181(1)(c) states that the Public Protector has the powers “to take appropriate remedial action”, when a state official or institution is found to have done wrong, as is the case of the President in the Nkandla debacle.

If this section of the Constitution is read with the Public Protector Act, it is clear that decisions or findings by the Public Protector are binding and can only be contested in and reviewed by a court application. The Public Protector is “independent, and subject only to the Constitution and the law”. The Public Protector is not subject to any other form of doubt.

So when political leaders like the Speaker and president explicitly state that they have a different view on certain findings and remedial action steps of a Public Protector report, they are actually disagreeing with the Constitution.

Despite the skewed views of ANC leaders specifically on the Nkandla scandal, they choose to publically shame the Office of the Public Protector instead of sticking to the letter of the law and following the rules of engagement. It must be noted that they have not taken any steps to review the Secure in Comfort report in a court of law.

But President Zuma certainly has a talent for in fact keeping himself out of court. Although when he does litigate, as when he opposed the handover of the Spy Tapes to the DA in court after court, you can be sure that it is the taxpayer who pays his legal bills.

The Constitution also regulates the co-independence of the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. Of late we have seen growing instances where the Executive has undermined the oversight role that Parliament, as the National ‘Legislature’, has on it. For example President Jacob Zuma and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa both avoided answering hard questions in the National Assembly within the past 30 days; this was compounded by the fact that the Speaker of Parliament, Baleka Mbete, is an ANC deployee who would rather protect her party, while undermining constitutional values and the sovereignty of Parliament.

And the ANC no longer even pretends that they respect the Constitution and the separation of Party and State. This weekend the ANC National Executive Committee decided that Parliament must do more to protect President Zuma and Deputy President Ramaphosa from “humiliation and embarrassment” at the hands of opposition parties.

This reminds me plainly of the Apartheid government’s approach to its opposition in the form of one Helen Suzman, a lone voice fighting against Apartheid inside Parliament, and a forefather of the DA. Suzman said then, and I paraphrase, that it is not the questions of the opposition that embarrass the government, but the answers of the government that embarrass itself.

While our Constitution today is a living document, which should be relevant to the society which it regulates, and is subject to amendment in the most extreme of cases, as long as it remains the supreme law of the land and without amendment, it must be respected and upheld, even when the ANC disagrees with it.

The Constitution and the values and laws it enshrines should be vigorously protected, and it should never be taken lightly when it is questioned and undermined by the political elite – in fact, it should deeply concern us all.

Society is kept together due to rules and the supremacy of those rules. If we do not have these laws in place, South Africa will end up democracy-less, like our neighbours in Lesotho, or become a failed state, which is ruled rather than governed.

The hope for South Africa is amongst those who stand up to protect our constitution, against those who undermine it daily. The hope for South Africa lies in those who uphold the rule of law, and who ask the difficult questions, to which this government has only embarrassing answers.

South Africans need to champion our Constitution, which is the result of the blood, sweat and tears of men like the late Nelson Mandela, who lived his every day for upholding the Constitution and law, even when it did not favour him.

Let no man, woman or child underestimate the grave risk to our freedom which the current counter-constitutional attitude of the ANC leadership is bringing to bear.

South Africa must not allow itself to be distracted by a president who is himself distracted. DM