MK Party's ConCourt bid to halt first Parly sitting unlikely to succeed due to lack of evidence - constitutional experts
In its court papers, the MK Party said it had evidence of voter rigging, which it would share with the court at a later stage.
Picture: X/MkhontoweSizwex
JOHANNESBURG - Some constitutional experts say the lack of evidence in the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party’s Constitutional Court application, means it is unlikely to succeed.
The party filed an urgent application to the apex court seeking to halt the first sitting of Parliament on Friday.
In its court papers, the MK Party said it had evidence of voter rigging, which it would share with the court at a later stage.
Research and advocacy officer at Judges Matter, Mbekezeli Benjamin, said that a high burden of proof needed to be met to force the ConCourt to interfere in the processes of another legislative arm.
"So, if there is a risk the judiciary will interfere with the functions of another arm of state, in this case Parliament, then you need to show strong evidence that it’s absolutely necessary. And from what the court papers of the MK Party say, there is no such reason to justify why the Constitutional Court should interfere with Parliament."
Executive secretary at the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC), Lawson Naidoo, said that lack of evidence had weakened the MK Party's already weak case.
"They have not placed any evidence before the court, let alone prima facie evidence of irregularities to enable the court to take what would be an extraordinary step to interdict a sitting of the National Assembly, so I think the failure to provide even an iota of evidence and their failure to take the matter up with the Electoral Court, as they ought to have done, is going to stand against them."