SONA 2015

Space_Chief said:
Intent is serious. If these cops were armed on purpose to show the DA and others that if they also try something funny now and in the future the same may await them, that's one issue. It's probably just a mistake.
Click to expand...

The mistake would be one of those armed men having their service pistol go off while they are removing someone from Parly. All it takes is one bullet, one moment to make that mistake. They should not have been allowed in at all and all that Baleka was doing was reading instructions sent to her via her tablet in front of her. Throughout you could read her body language and see that she was not in control of the situation at all.

Even if they weren't supposed to be armed, we now have the expectation that whomever removes someone from the chambers next time, they will enter in carrying a service pistol. That is completely out of line.
 
Paul Hjul said:
not only does it raise direct constitutional issues calling in SAPS but statute already provides for the matter and there was no present threat to safety
Click to expand...

You're assuming someone did not make a mistake or maybe did not know the correct statute.
 
Space_Chief said:
Maybe. But now--- and against whom?

EFF? EFF has pretty populist and anti-business policies. At least ANC is made of guys like Ramaphosa and Sexwale but EFF said they'd nationalise the mines and so on, didn't they? The ANC in effect has shown that a certain degree of stability remains and that they will not go to such left wing measures as EFF would-- at least for now. They could have formed a coalition with the EFF, ne?

ANC has only used the cops against the EFF too. Sure it's an opposition party the EFF have behaved in a particular way and one can argue that it's not conducive to running a parliament.

DA (and others) has been official opposition to ANC for many years longer. This has never been an issue against them.
Click to expand...

The constitution is there for all... you can't break the rules for one party cos they don't like what someone is saying. If they willing to bring armed police in(who answer to the current government) to remove someone who has the right to speak, then whats stopping them from removing all opposition by force. This isn't about anc, eff, da... this is about breaking the highest laws of our country. If those can be broken, then they may as well toss it in the bin and start the dictatorship.

I'm not a Julius fan, but they were within their rights, same with DA, the rules are there for a reason to stop the current ruling party from using police and military against opposition parties. Tonight, parliament used current ruling party 'assets' against an opposition party. That can't be allowed, ever.
 
Radebe confirms police were involved in removing EFF but says SA not a police state.
 
Space_Chief said:
Cops were nearby. Cops patrol parliamentary grounds too.

Maybe. I don't think this was a show of force against the DA at least. I don't think the ANC needs to do that. They have a clear majority. They can just ignore the opposition.
Click to expand...

SAPS generally hand over control over the Parliamentary Precinct (which is not absolutely defined - the RGA has a different definition to the Immunities Act which is different to the last version of the Rules which I read) to the parliamentary security structures. More importantly entry into the Assembly is something quite different from being in the building.

The Sheriff of Cape Town does not effect service within the Assembly - summons to officers of Parliament are not made in the House and customarily no armed person enters the chamber without the Leave of the S-a-A and such Leave cannot be given when the House is sitting - back in the day the Sheriff would wait outside for the Clerk of the House to receive service.

Gatherings within the area of Parliament are proscribed without permission of the Chief Magistrate for Cape Town - and such permission is given only after the CoCT has processed the notice of the gathering and it is cleared with the Parliamentary security detail and will not require additional riot policing.

The simple fact of the matter is that WHILE SITTING armed persons were called in to coerce members of the chamber. If the Speaker genuinely is unable to contain the House she must adjourn and order the evacuation, once that happens then the riot police or fire brigade or boswell wilkey circus can enter.
 
ellyally said:
The constitution is there for all... you can't break the rules for one party cos they don't like what someone is saying. If they willing to bring armed police in(who answer to the current government) to remove someone who has the right to speak, then whats stopping them from removing all opposition by force. This isn't about anc, eff, da... this is about breaking the highest laws of our country. If those can be broken, then they may as well toss it in the bin and start the dictatorship.

I'm not a Julius fan, but they were within their rights, same with DA, the rules are there for a reason to stop the current ruling party from using police and military against opposition parties. Tonight, parliament used current ruling party 'assets' against an opposition party. That can't be allowed, ever.
Click to expand...

This session was not for what the EFF was doing though. And I agree what they did was improper but I don't think they did this to intimidate. They don't need to. They have a majority. They could have maybe cancelled the SONA thing? Would that have been better?

Whether this was EFF or IFP or DA who did this, it would the the same thing IMO. Of course maybe the ANC really wants to show the country AND THE WORLD - and Zuma just returned from Davos where he rubbed elbows with Cameron and Hollande who face angry MPs every day - ... nah I don't think so. Somebody probably made a mistake.
 
Space_Chief said:
This session was not for what the EFF was doing though. And I agree what they did was improper but I don't think they did this to intimidate. They don't need to. They have a majority. They could have maybe cancelled the SONA thing? Would that have been better?

Whether this was EFF or IFP or DA who did this, it would the the same thing IMO. Of course maybe the ANC really wants to show the country AND THE WORLD - and Zuma just returned from Davos where he rubbed elbows with Cameron and Hollande who face angry MPs every day - ... nah I don't think so. Somebody probably made a mistake.
Click to expand...

The president as already ducked his constitutional obligation to answer questions in front of parliament.

This was their first opportunity to question him. I'm glad it was raised. It's extremely pertinent to the state of the nation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X