Mbalula: SACP's decision to contest elections will split members
ANC secretary general
'Technically, dual membership doesn't fall away. But practically, once a decision to contest is implemented, members will be required to choose between the ANC and the SACP,' Mbalula told a media briefing on Wednesday.
He said the ANC's national executive committee (NEC) had held extensive discussions about the effect of the SACP's plans, adding that the alliance could not function as usual while one of its partners in the tripartite alliance contested elections outside of the collective.
'As a revolutionary movement, we recognise the SACP's right as an independent organisation to chart its own electoral path. However, as a movement that has shared trenches with the SACP in the struggle for freedom, we have communicated our profound disaccommodation with this decision,' he said.
He added that although the ANC recognises the SACP's historical role in the liberation movement and its ideological contributions, the communist party now needs to confront the practical consequences of divergent electoral paths.
'There are a lot of things we share with the communist party, including election strategy. They attend our workshops and participate in our processes, including the appointment of public representatives. This decision will mean that all of those things must be reviewed,' said Mbalula.
The SACP has long agitated for more autonomy and influence over state policy.
'If they've made the decision, we cannot persuade them away from it,' Mbalula said. 'Then we must embark on a new path. We cannot waste time on a party that has decided to contest elections on its own.'
Factions in the SACP have also expressed concern about the party's decision and being potentially forced to take sides between it and the ANC, which could see some potentially losing their perks as cabinet ministers.
ANC president
'We recognise that the SACP is an independent political organisation that has the right to contest elections as it sees fit. But we believe that this decision has fundamental implications for the strategy and programme of the national democratic revolution and the alliance that has led the struggle for liberation in our country since the 1920s,' he said at the end of the ANC NEC meeting on Monday.
'As the ANC, we are seriously concerned that this decision taken by the SACP to participate in elections in their own name and right will significantly weaken the forces for national democratic change.'
Ramaphosa reiterated that members who hold dual membership remain bound by the ANC's constitution.
'We will continue to engage with the SACP to see the extent to which the decision they have taken can be fully understood and also the extent to which we will be able to work together as the 2026 elections come,' he said.
Speaking at the SACP's 104th anniversary celebrations in KwaDlangezwa, KwaZulu-Natal, last week, general secretary Solly Mapaila criticised Ramaphosa's handling of the matter.
'Ramaphosa took a take-it-or-leave-it approach.I am tired of attending meaningless meetings with the ANC. If you go to meetings with people you know will not implement what you agreed upon, there is something wrong with you,' he said.
He pointed to ongoing frustrations, including the ANC's consistent refusal to grant SACP ministers genuine authority in ANC-led departments, and its failure to prioritise key issues such as land redistribution and the advancement of indigenous languages.
Mapaila said the decision for the SACP to contest elections stemmed from a resolution taken at the party's 2022 congress, rather than from any personal ambition.
The SACP first resolved to explore electoral independence at its 2017 congress. A July by-election in Seshego marked the first time the party formally entered the fray, though it failed to win the ward.
The SACP has increasingly argued for a broader left-wing platform, independent of the ANC, that includes trade unions, NGOs and research bodies.
In its last congress, the party adopted a resolution to advocate for policies such as a universal basic income grant, public employment programmes, and resistance to austerity.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald
an hour ago
- The Herald
'Urgent, decisive action' being taken after deadly e-hailing attack: Creecy
Meanwhile, the South African Metered Taxi and E-Hailing Association (Samtea) in Gauteng has also condemned the incident. The association has welcomed the MEC for roads and transport's crisis committee, which it said brings together all stakeholders in the public transport value chain. 'This inclusive platform is vital to restoring peace, clarity and stability in the sector,' said Samtea chair Sibongiseni Shange. Explaining the structure, Shange said Santaco was the apex council representing all public transport modes — minibus taxis, metered taxis, e-hailing, and scholar and cross-border transport — under one constitution aligned with the supreme law. He said SAMTEA represents metered taxi and e-hailing operators within this framework. 'We caution that actions by individual operators — legal or illegal — can distort public perceptions, unfairly painting the entire sector as criminal. Criminal syndicates exploit policy gaps, unemployment and exclusionary technologies to infiltrate this essential service,' he said.
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Former ANC MP Vincent Smith denied R2m for legal defence in fraud case
Former ANC MP Vincent Smith, pictured here appearing in court, has been unsuccessful in his bid to access just over R2 million to fund his defence in his upcoming criminal trial. Image: Supplied Fraud and corruption-accused former ANC MP Vincent Smith has suffered a major blow after he was refused access to over R2 million to fund his defence in the looming criminal trial. The former chairperson of the National Assembly's Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services is facing charges that he received payments totalling R600,000 from former Bosasa (now African Global Operations) chief operations officer Angelo Agrizzi, who is his co-accused in the matter alongside Smith's company, Euroblitz 48. The 65-year-old Smith and Euroblitz 48 together face seven counts of corruption and 18 of fraud, as well as money laundering and offences relating to the Tax Administration Act. Smith maintains that the funds were a loan and had electric fencing and a security system installed in one of his properties in Johannesburg by Bosasa. In addition, Agrizzi also facilitated payments totalling R277,000, and some of the funds were used to pay for Smith's daughter's studies abroad in tranches between R10,000 and R220,000. Smith failed to declare the benefits he received from Bosasa as required of all members of Parliament by the Code of Ethical Conduct and Disclosure of Members' Interests. The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) also accuses Smith of trying to return the favour to Bosasa by rubbishing a high-level probe into tender fraud at the Department of Correctional Services conducted by the Special Investigating Unit when the matter came before the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services, which he chaired in Parliament at the time. Earlier this year, the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, Acting Deputy Judge President Thifhelimbilu Mudau dismissed with costs Smith's application for the release of funds in terms of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (Poca) for legal expenses in his criminal trial limited to R2m. Smith's two properties registered at the Johannesburg and Pretoria deeds registries were placed under a preservation order granted in April 2021, in accordance with Poca. The application was brought by National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi and dealt with the properties and was meant to safeguard them to satisfy a possible confiscation order to the value of nearly R47m. Smith disclosed a monthly pension from his annuity of R88,459 after tax deductions and R7,500 from property rental. He explained that his actual expenses amounted to R77,545 a month, which left him with a surplus of approximately R18,415 monthly. Smith complained that the amount was inadequate to fund his trial for the anticipated entire term and insisted that he had made a full disclosure of all assets relating to the determination of the value of realisable property. However, Batohi told the court that Smith has never filed any application for living and legal expenses since the restraint order was granted, and admitted he could meet his expenses from unrestrained assets. She said Smith saved over R18,000 a month for the last four-and-a-half years since he was arrested and could have had nearly R1m available towards his legal expenses, but instead continued with his exorbitant monthly expenses. The exorbitant monthly expenses include R11,550 on credit cards and overdrafts, R16,500 on groceries, R7,200 on rent, despite owning properties, R8,100 on a domestic helper and garden services, R2,098 on a cellphone, R2,000 for clothing, R1,480 for satellite television, R899 for Wi-Fi, R5,500 on petrol while he is unemployed, R9,000 for medical fees, R1,000 on his tithe, and R3,200 on printing. Additionally, the court heard that Smith's disclosed income and expenses increased exponentially between the period May 2023 to March 2025, and he failed to provide a declaration of the increase in his income and/or expenses or supporting documents in support of the increase. Smith failed to challenge the allegation that his income and/or expenses had increased, and his legal representative argued that the failure to file a replying affidavit was merely a mistake. Judge Mudau also dismissed with costs his application for leave to appeal, for which he provided reasons on Tuesday this week. Smith indicated that the court erred in reading into the clear provisions of Poca that he must make a full declaration of his assets and liabilities. 'The application for leave to appeal is wholly unmerited,' ruled Judge Mudau. On Thursday, Smith said he is yet to discuss the way forward with his legal team and has nothing to say at this point. Henry Mamothame, spokesperson for the NPA's Investigative Directorate Against Corruption, said Smith's criminal trial is set down for October at the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg.
Mail & Guardian
an hour ago
- Mail & Guardian
High court victory for coastal communities against TotalEnergies, Shell over offshore drilling
The high court in the Western Cape has set aside the government's approval of the environmental authorisation for TotalEnergies EP South Africa to drill for oil and gas in offshore areas known as Block 5/6/7 along the country's south-west coast. The high court in the Western Cape has set aside the government's approval of the environmental authorisation for TotalEnergies EP South Africa The court has sent the matter back to the department of minerals and petroleum to make a fresh decision, following further studies, the addition of further information and public participation. While the authorisation was initially granted to TotalEnergies, the company intends to transfer the environmental authorisation to Shell to conduct the drilling. Wednesday's In addition to setting aside the environmental authorisation, the court ordered that a fresh decision be made. Before any approval can be reconsidered, Total — or Shell — must submit new or amended assessments. These must fully examine the socio-economic impacts of a well blowout on coastal communities; the project's full life-cycle climate impacts; all factors required under the The bulk of the applicants review grounds were premised on the final environmental impact assessment report failing to meet the standards imposed by the Specifically, they contended that the decisions to grant the environmental authorisation were unlawful and irrational in six respects. Among these were that the final environmental impact assessment report failed to properly assess — and the state respondents failed to consider — the socio-economic effects of the proposed project, 'which a well blowout and consequent oil spill will have on the fishing industry and small-scale fishers'. The applicants argued that the state respondents failed to consider the factors prescribed by the Integrated Coastal Management Act and failed to properly assess and consider the need and desirability of the proposed project in relation to the climate change impacts, 'which will be caused by burning any gas discovered by the proposed project'. The state respondents failed to assess and consider the transboundary effects of the proposed project both on Namibia and on international waters. Neither the final environmental impact assessment report, nor the environmental management programme report, included Total's oil spill or blowout contingency plans, they argued. The respondents were the ministers of environment and energy, the director-general of the department of mineral resources and energy, TotalEnergies EP South Africa Block 567 and Shell Exploration & Production South Africa. In its judgment, the court found that the environmental impact assessment failed to fully examine the consequences of a major oil spill on local and neighbouring coastal communities, ignored coastal protection laws and omitted critical climate and fairness considerations, said Shahil Singh, the legal adviser to the Green Connection. 'A critical omission, the oil spill and blowout contingency plans were withheld from the public until after approval, denying communities the chance to comment on emergency preparedness,' Singh said. 'Total and Shell will now need to undertake additional studies, make these plans publicly available and properly assess both coastal and cross-border risks before any decision is taken.' The court found that the lack of oil spill and blowout contingency plans meant that there had not been a full assessment and description of the manner in which Total intended to respond to pollution or environmental degradation, as required by the National Environment Management Act. The court found it even more problematic that there was no public participation in relation to the response plans. Singh termed the court victory a significant win for transparency, precaution and for the rights of coastal communities and small-scale fishers who refuse to be sidelined in decisions that affect their livelihoods and the future of our oceans. While the project's final environmental impact assessment report admitted that an oil spill or blowout could cause serious damage to the coastal environment, it did not assess the full economic and social impacts on the small-scale fishers and coastal communities who depend on these waters for food and income. To the extent that there were or are limitations in conducting such assessments, Total was compelled to adopt a cautious approach and take protective and preventive measures before the anticipated harm of an oil spill or blowout materialised. 'Once the final environmental impact assessment report identified the potential blow out and oil spill as potentially significant impact or risk, it was obliged to assess the consequences and the probability of the impact or risk, including those with a low degree of probability of a blowout or oil spill,' the judgment read. That is in light of the risk-averse and cautious approach espoused by the National Environment Management Act and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, in terms of which the limitation on present knowledge about the consequences of an environmental decision must be taken into account. 'The precautionary approach entails that where there is a threat of serious or irreversible damage to a resource, the lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. 'It means that, where there exists evidence of possible environmental harm, such as a possible blow-out or oil spill as the final environmental impact assessment report accepts, a cautious approach should be adopted, and if necessary decision-makers may compel the party to take protective and preventive measures before the anticipated harm materialises.' Scientific spill modelling for the project showed that oil from a disaster could reach the waters and shores of Namibia. International law, and South Africa's own laws, require that the impacts on neighbouring countries should be considered, and that there was an obligation for the environmental impact assessment to consider the harms caused by transboundary impacts, and for this to be considered by the decision-makers. The court found they did not. According to the judgment, at the very least, it has been established that there is a risk of oil spill and a blowout occurring, and a risk of the oil reaching Namibian waters and the Namibian shoreline. The approach adopted by the respondents, to the effect that the National Environment Management Act and the environmental impact assessment regulations do not require environmental impact assessment to assess and predict transboundary harm is 'inconsistent with the customary international law and international law obligations. 'It is also contrary to the [ National Environment Management Act] principles and Integrated Coastal Management Act, which recognise the need to discharge global and international responsibilities,' the court found. The court confirmed that the assessment of climate change impacts should form part of this assessment. 'While it is correct that the specific activity for which the environmental authorisation in this case is granted is exploration and not production, and that the former process will not always result in the latter process, the two processes are intertwined,' the judgment noted. There would be no point in conducting an exploration activity unless an entity hoped to proceed to the next phase of production. 'And it is not speculation to conclude that by the time such an entity applies for authorisation to conduct the next phase, it is armed with information that places it at an advantage to proceed to the next phase.' Climate change is relevant to both exploration and production activities. 'It makes no sense to rely on the positive consequences of the production stage for purposes of considering an application at the exploration stage, only to resist considering the negative consequences of the production stage when it comes to consideration of climate change.' The judgment is 'a victory in the growing opposition to oil and gas exploration in our country', said Melissa Groenink-Groves, the defending rights programme manager at Natural Justice. 'Recently, a number of oil and gas projects have been given environmental authorisation but this judgment again confirms that companies must follow due process, undertake comprehensive assessments and provide communities with an opportunity to have their voices heard, in respect of all relevant information. 'It confirms that our fight for our environmental rights is strong and that we must continue for the future for our children,' she said. Lesai Seema, director at Cullinan & Associates, which represented the applicants, said the judgment makes it clear that the granting of environmental authorisation for offshore oil and gas exploitation will be unlawful if the decision-maker does not carefully consider a range of factors necessary to 'safeguard the long-term collective interests of people and other living organisms who depend on the coastal and marine environment'.
