Spokesperson for the National Assembly Speaker, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, says discussions will be held with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) regarding handing herself over to the Lyttleton Police Station in Pretoria.
Mike Ramagoma says the urgent interdict application launched by the Speaker was only to ensure that she present herself with her legal representative who was busy with a different matter in the KwaZulu-Natal Division of the High Court. This follows corruption allegations levelled against the Speaker by a defence contractor over incidents that allegedly occurred during her tenure as Defence Minister.
Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula | NPA mum on arrest of NA Speaker after application struck off the roll:
Ramagoma spoke to SABC News after the High Court in Pretoria dismissed the Speaker’s urgent interdict application.
“If she has to be called in, either through a summons or to come to a court or to a police station, she needs to be able to do that when her lawyer is available and the date that we had put that her attorney would be available was the 3rd of April, which is tomorrow,” says Ramagoma.
“And so, in a way, we were able to ensure that if she is required, she goes there with a lawyer and the lawyer would be available from tomorrow. Anytime from there, we can arrange such an appearance. There will be discussions with the NPA in terms of what is the next move now. Those matters will be decided there,” he adds.
Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula | ‘ANC unlikely to suffer major blow’: Prof Ntsikelelo Breakfast
Delivering the judgment, Judge Sulet Potterill says it would not be competent for courts to interdict arrests as it would lead to the collapse of the criminal justice system.
The Speaker sought the intervention of the court to prevent the state from effecting an arrest against her.
However, Potterill says if the court were to grant such an order it would lead to the criminal justice system being controlled by suspects.
She delivered the judgment in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.
“The respondents argued that it would not be competent for this court to interdict an arrest. I’m in full agreement with this submission. Not on the facts presented, but more importantly, a court has to take cognisance of the fact that if a court grants such an order, the floodgates would be opened. Every suspect would be in a position to approach a court on an urgent basis setting out, on speculation, that there is a weak case against it and interdict an arrest,” argued Potterill.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance (DA) is demanding that its motion of no confidence against Mapisa-Nqakula be debated and voted on this week.
The DA’s application for the motion was accepted by Acting Speaker Lechesa Tsenoli last week after Mapisa-Nqakula placed herself on special leave.
DA Chief Whip Siviwe Gwarube says they welcome the Pretoria High Court’s ruling.
“This is an important decision because it sends a clear message that individuals who are facing serious allegations cannot evade accountability and that all are equal before the law. And that your political connection cannot allow you to evade accountability or allow you to be treated with kids gloves by law enforcement agencies. Additionally, what this decision has done is to affirm the DA’s call for a motion of no confidence against Mapisa-Nqakula and the urgency with which it must be debated and voted on,” adds Gwarube.
Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula | ‘We believe she will remain a loyal ANC member’: Nomvula Mokonyane
