Advertisement

A Perspective on the Principle of ‘Constitutionalism’ in Relation to Executive and Legislative Accountability in South Africa

  • Andile Mcineka
  • Nomthandazo NtlamaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in African Economic, Social and Political Development book series (AAESPD)

Abstract

This chapter explores the significance of the principle of constitutionalism to accountability in relation to the functional independence of each of the branches of the government. In this regard, we reviewed selected cases of the Constitutional Court: United Democratic Movement v Speaker of the National Assembly, Black Sash Trust v Minister of Social Development and Others, and Economic Freedom Fighters v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others. We used these judgments to affirm the argument herein. We argue that constitutionalism is an amalgam of the principle of judicial review and a basic tool for enforcing accountability. It further raises the question of whether constitutionalism is at a crossroad in South Africa, because of what seems to be a lack of moral and ethical leadership in the regulation of state authority within the required standards and norms (Shaikh and Zungu 2017). There were reports that the President called on people take the money to bribe them, and used it to pay for their children’s school fees and then voted correctly. He said this to the loud cheers from the group. This report indicated a grave compromise of moral authority and ethical leadership that, in fact, should steer the exercise of state authority in a way that conforms to the principle of constitutionalism.

References

  1. Afolayan, A. (2009). Poverty as statecraft: Preliminary reflections on African leadership (2009) Lumina 20(2), pp 1–23.Google Scholar
  2. eNCA (08/08/2017). Explainer: How a secret ballot works in a no confidence motion. Retrieved on August 13, 2–017, from http://www.enca.com/south-africa/how-a-secret-ballot-works-in-a-no-confidence-motion
  3. February, J. (2015). South Africa: The judiciary and the executive – at peace for now’, ISS Today, 9 September 2015. Available from https://issafrica.org/iss-today/the-judiciary-and-the-executive-at-peace-for-now (accessed 28 August 2017).
  4. Federico, V. (2001). Constitutionalism and Democratic Transitions: Lessons from South Africa, Via Cittadella, Florence: Florence University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hosken, G. (2017). Defence minister in talks after Lesotho Defence Force chief killed. Timeslive 5 September 2017. Available from https://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2017-09-05-defence-minister-in-talks-after-lesotho-defence-force-chief-killed/ (accessed 7 September 2017).
  6. Liebenberg, S. (2002). South Africa’s evolving jurisprudence on socio-economic rights: An effective tool in challenging poverty? Law, Development and Democracy 6 (22), pp. 159–191.Google Scholar
  7. Mangu, A. (1998). Separation of powers and federalism in African constitutionalism: The South African case. Master of Laws Dissertation, University of South Africa, June 1998.Google Scholar
  8. Matiwane, Z. (2017). KZN ANC march against the judiciary. IOL, 15 May, available from https://www.iol.co.za/mercury/news/kzn-anc-march-against-judiciary-9147375, (accessed 6 September 2017).
  9. Mngadi, M. (2017). We are disgusted by court’s overreach – KZN ANC. News24, 15 May 2. Available from http://m.news24.com/news24/SouthAfrica/News/we-are-disgusted-by-courts-overreach-kzn-anc-20170515 (accessed 5 September 2017).
  10. Moseneke, D. (2015). Separation of powers: Have the courts crossed the line? GroundUp, 24 July. Available from https://www.groundup.org.za/article/separation-powers-have-courts-crossed-line_3152/ (accessed 25 August 2017).
  11. Ndlangisa, S. (2017). It’s poor judgment: Mogoeng concerned about apparently baseless perception. Timeslive, 11 July. Available from https://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2017-07-11-its-poor-judgment-mogoeng-concerned-about-apparently-baseless-perceptions/ (accessed 25 July 2017).
  12. Ntlama, N. (2012). The “Deference” of Judicial Authority to the State. Obiter, Vol. 1, pp. 133–142.Google Scholar
  13. Ntlama, N. (2015). Commentary on this meeting. Radio Umhlobo Wenene FM, 25 August.Google Scholar
  14. Ntlama, N. (2016). The law of privilege and the Economic Freedom Fighters in South Africa’s National Assembly: The aftermath of the 7th May 2014 National Elections. De Jure, 49 (2), pp. 213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. O’Reilley, K. (2015). Meeting between the Chief Justice and the President. De Rebus: Law Society of South Africa, 30 September. Available from http://www.derebus.org.za/meeting-president-chief-justice (accessed 28 August 2017).
  16. Olasunkanmi, A. (2014). Constitutionalism and the challenges of development in Africa. International Journal of Politics and Governance, 5(4), pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
  17. Rapatsa, M. (2014). Transformative constitutionalism in South Africa: 20 years of democracy. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(27), pp. 887–895.Google Scholar
  18. Shaikh, N. & Zungu, L. (2017). Zuma Vote: Name and shame list shakes ANC. IOL, 14 August. Available from https://www.iol.co.za/sunday-tribune/news/name-and-shame-list-shakes-anc-10783090 (accessed 14 August 2017).
  19. South Africa Today, (27/08/2015). Zuma to meet with disgruntled judges. Available from https://southafricatoday.net/south-africa-news/zuma-to-meet-with-disgruntled-judges/ (accessed 25 July 2017).
  20. Vrancken, A. (2016). Application, interpretation and limitation of the Bill of Rights. Revised by Shaik-Peremanov in Govindjee A (ed) Introduction to Human Rights Law, 2nd ed. Lexis Nexis, Durban.Google Scholar
  21. Webbstock, D. (2015). Content analysis of the baseline institutional submissions for phase 1 of the quality enhancement project, Council on Higher Education (CHE). Available from http://www.che.ac.za/media_and_publications/research/content-analysis-baseline-institutional-submissions-phase-1-quality (accessed 5 June 2017).

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of KwaZulu-Natal, (UKZN), Candidate Attorney: Tomlinson Mnguni James AttorneysUmhlangaSouth Africa
  2. 2.Nelson R. Mandela School of Law, University of Fort HareAliceSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations