A MOTION to remove South African President Jacob Zuma after a court ruled he had violated its constitution in a spending scandal has been defeated in the country’s parliament.
Representatives rejected the move by 233 votes to 143 in a rowdy session that saw some ruling party and opposition members hurl insults and jeer at each other.
A two-thirds majority was needed to oust Zuma, but his ruling African National Congress (ANC), which had supported him throughout, has a comfortable majority.
Zuma apologised after the Constitutional Court ruled that he had failed to uphold the constitution in a scandal over millions of dollars of state funds he had spent extending his private home. The court also said the National Assembly had failed in its obligations to hold the president to account.
The president secured the backing of ANC heavyweights on Friday, after he apologised for failing to repay some of the $16 million (£11.3m) of state money he spent on his private residence, which had led to the constitutional court ruling against him.
“The president has apologised and that’s the humility that is necessary for any leader,” said ANC general secretary Gwede Mantashe, after senior members of the party met to discuss the issue.
This is arguably the biggest scandal to hit the president, who has fended off accusations of corruption, influence peddling and even rape since before he took office in 2009.
The opposition, led by the Democratic Alliance (DA), launched the impeachment proceedings, which were voted on yesterday.
It said Zuma was no longer fit to govern, but the ANC dismissed the move as a publicity stunt. The DA demanded a secret ballot, but parliamentary speaker Baleka Mbete rejected that.
Zuma is the most colourful and controversial president South Africa has had since white-minority rule ended in 1994. He was born into poverty, fought apartheid from exile and has been embroiled in numerous scandals, which would have ended the careers of many politicians.
The work on Zuma’s home included building a cattle enclosure, amphitheatre, swimming pool, visitor centre and chicken run. He apologised to South Africans for the “frustration and confusion” caused by the scandal and vowed to pay the money back.
Zuma’s private life has also caused much controversy. The 73-year-old is a proud polygamist – in accordance with Zulu tradition – and currently has four wives.
He is also known for his infidelity and has fathered a child with another woman.
His political career was written off before the 2009 election when he was simultaneously battling allegations of rape and corruption. He was acquitted of rape, but the corruption case has proved harder to shake off.
He has always denied charges of money-laundering and racketeering, which stemmed from a controversial $5 billion (£3.6bn) arms deal signed in 1999, and had said he would resign if found guilty of wrong-doing.
The case was controversially dropped by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) just weeks before the elections that saw him installed as president.
Seven years later, the opposition is still fighting for the charges to be reinstated and has asked the courts to review the NPA’s decision. There is yet to be a ruling in the case.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here