CAPE TOWN, WESTERN CAPE — National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza is facing intense scrutiny from the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) regarding her handling of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala impeachment legal challenge. During a recent Section 89 committee meeting, opposition leaders accused the Speaker of abandoning her constitutional mandate by choosing not to oppose the President’s court bid to halt the inquiry.
Julius Malema, leading the EFF delegation, argued that Didiza neglected her duty to protect the legislature’s oversight authority. According to Malema, the Speaker was legally bound to fight the President’s move to challenge the parliamentary panel’s report. He clarified that Didiza sought independent legal counsel rather than relying on the committee’s lawyers, and that her own advisors gave her a singular directive.
“The president is challenging the panel report of Parliament. The speaker’s advice, legal advice, was only one option: oppose. There were no two options,” Malema asserted.
He accused Didiza of acting dishonestly in media interviews by suggesting she had the discretion to simply abide by the court process after receiving unfavorable counsel. “Then the legal advice told her what she didn’t want to hear… Her advice doesn’t have that option. It is your advice which has got that option,” Malema stated, emphasizing that her independent legal team explicitly instructed her to oppose the application.
Echoing these sentiments, MKP representative Andile Mngxitama called for decisive action to correct what he termed the Speaker’s abdication of responsibility. Mngxitama stressed that the committee must move beyond mere disappointment and adopt a firmer stance to compel Didiza to fulfill her duties.
Highlighting the institutional stakes, he noted that the highest court has already mandated that Parliament must execute its work. “She has the institutional leadership to protect the work of this Parliament,” Mngxitama remarked.
He criticized the Speaker’s passive approach, arguing she cannot simply “throw her hands out and say that let the process take its course.” Instead, Mngxitama insisted that Didiza must take an active position to defend the legislature. Urging the committee to intervene, he concluded that they must “find a way to persuade her to do what is correct” to safeguard the integrity of the institution.