It may not have been a comfortable united front of opposition parties, but they stood together on the stairs of the National Assembly saying they would “not be complicit in the violation of our Constitution”. They announced “collective” action to engage ordinary South Africans around the constitutional violations by the president, a request for Parliament to institute disciplinary proceedings against Zuma, and possible court action. “We can’t sacrifice our Constitution at the altar of Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla,” said DA leader Mmusi Maimane.

Earlier in the day, the opposition parties met to strategise in the face of a governing party not shy to use its numbers to get its way.

It had been almost a year since this had happened. In late 2014 there was co-operation among the opposition and talks with the leader of government business at Parliament, Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, in an effort to broker a “political” agreement to the chaos in the House. In August that year the “Pay back the money” vocal demands by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) had scuppered the presidential question slot in the House. Instead Ramaphosa was sharply criticised from within the ANC for this move, and the truce fell apart. And ultimately opposition unity fell apart in late July 2015, when all opposition parties supported a new rule to eject unruly MPs, which the EFF regarded as a slap in the face.

This break-up has now been reversed by the way the ANC decided to handle the motion to remove Zuma from office following the landmark Constitutional Court judgment finding the president had failed to abide by his oath of office. Section 83(b) of the Constitution specifically states that the president “must uphold, defend and respect the Constitution as the supreme law of the Republic”.

While “collectively engaging ordinary South Africans” may not happen today, the joint opposition front means the request for disciplinary charges against the president will reach National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete on Wednesday. It is unlikely to be entertained by Mbete, who is also ANC national chairwoman.

However, it will be further pressure on the Speaker, who was asked to recuse herself because of bias from Tuesday’s debate. One by one, opposition parties called on her to step down for the debate in terms of Rule 15 as she was “conflicted” not only because of her position in the ANC, but also as party to the Constitutional Court hearing arguing against the binding nature of the public protector’s findings.

But the ANC maintained that as there was nothing in law or the Constitution requiring Mbete to recuse herself, she would stay put.

Ironically, by arguing this, the ANC diminished the standing of Parliament as one of the spheres of state with the power to set its own way of doing things. However, politically it was unacceptable for Mbete to vacate the chair. Such a move would be regarded as conceding to the opposition, which according to the dominant view in the ANC was not something to be done in an institution it dominates. So the House was suspended for consultations among political parties.

Curiously, Mbete spent at least part of the almost two hours adjournment in the company of State Security Minister David Mahlobo. Daily Maverick has reliably learnt that Mbete, Mahlobo and Secretary to Parliament Gengezi Mgidlana were together in the office of the Secretary to the National Assembly Masibulelo Xasa before a meeting between the Speaker and chief whips. It remains unclear what was discussed. What is clear, however, is that the EFF will go to court over Mbete’s failure to recuse herself.

In the debate the ANC argued its line developed in various high-level meetings since Friday. In a narrow interpretation of the judgment it goes like this: the president apologised and promised to make that repayment, there had been legal uncertainty over the public protector’s powers, and there was no finding of a “serious violation” in the Constitutional Court, which merely found the president had acted “inconsistent with the Constitution”. Thus the requirements of the Section 89(1) motion to remove the president were mere frivolous DA electioneering.

From the other side of the House the opposition message was that Zuma must be removed because he had violated the Constitution. “You can’t be inconsistent of the Constitution and want to tell us you are behaving in a correct manner,” said EFF leader Julius Malema. Instead of “thinking about your stomachs”, he urged ANC MPs to stand up for what is right. Referring to two of the three surviving Rivonia Treason trialists, who called on Zuma to step down, and concerns raised by uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) commanders and commissars, Malema said: “If you don’t want to listen to us because we are an opposition, at least listen to (Ahmed) Kathrada, listen to (Denis) Goldberg, listen to the MK real generals”.

As Tuesday’s debate unfolded former finance minister Trevor Manuel joined the ranks of several other high level ANC members calling for Zuma to resign, in addition to churches, civil society organisations and others.

Maimane described Zuma’s apology as an insult to the intelligence of South Africans. “It will be recorded that ANC members of this Parliament chose to defend a crooked, broken president instead of the Constitution and the rule of law. (Tuesday) will signal – once and for all – that the ANC has lost its way, and that there is no way back,” he said.

United Democratic Movement (UDM) leader Bantu Holomisa threw the cat among the pigeons by calling for the dissolution of Parliament and a process under an interim government to re-secure a mandate from South Africans.

Tuesday’s debate fell into the predictable party lines. That’s not unusual at Parliament where the ANC is not shy to tout its election victories. What is different is that the Constitution took central place, and the ANC found itself at the sharp end of a narrative that the governing party has lost its way.

The debate also showed the opposition collaboration right now allows scope for parties’ different approaches. It’s perhaps a lesson learnt from 2014. So like the ANC, which said it would explain itself to its structures with regards to the Constitutional Court ruling, the opposition parties will also hit the road collectively. With the ANC administration already announcing a series of government launches and imbizos, it will be a hard slog for those unable to draw on such resources.

The battle lines are now clear. DM

Photo: Speaker of parliament Baleka Mbete reacts during a debate in parliament Cape Town, South Africa, 05 April 2016. EPA/NIC BOTHMA