Hoekom Jy Vir die DA Moet Stem

Vanuit SA Vandag 17 April 2009

Gaan stem op Woensdag 22 April!

Elke enkele geregistreerde kieser wat die DA steun, moet op Woensdag in die verkiesing gaan stem. Elke stem is kritiek: dit kan die stem wees wat die skaal swaai. Die wiskunde is eenvoudig: hoe meer DA-kiesers in verhouding tot ANC-kiesers gaan stem, hoe beter is die kans dat ons sal sorg dat Jacob Zuma nie die meerderheid van twee derdes kry wat hy nodig het om die Grondwet te wysig nie.

Die opkoms van kiesers maak 'n geweldige verskil aan die verkiesingsuitslag in ons stelsel van proporsionele verteenwoordiging. Een politieke ontleder gebruik die analogie van 'n verjaardagpartytjie om die gevolge van opkomssyfers te verduidelik. Op jou verjaardag koop jy 'n koek en nooi tien mense na jou partytjie. As almal kom, kry elkeen een tiende van die koek. As net vyf kom, kry elkeen een vyfde. Dit beteken elkeen van die vyf vriende wat vir die partytjie opgedaag het, kry 'n stuk koek wat dubbel so groot is as wat hulle sou gekry het, net omdat die ander vyf weggebly het. Net so maak al die kiesers wat in 'n verkiesing stem, 100% van die verteenwoordigende getal uit, wat dan in verhouding onder die partye verdeel word. As meer DA-kiesers as ANC-kiesers wegbly, beteken dit dat die ANC-stem in verhouding groter word, en omgekeer.

In vorige verkiesings het die opkomsverhouding die ANC bevoordeel. Dit beteken dat meer ANC-kiesers as opposisiekiesers gaan stem het. Dit het hul getalle in verhouding opgestoot.

Die opkoms gaan op Woensdag deurslaggewend wees. Ons eie interne navorsing toon dat as elke DA-kieser gaan stem, en as meer DA-kiesers in verhouding tot ANC-kiesers opdaag, sal ons die ANC landswyd 'n meerderheid van twee derdes ontsê, en kan ons die ANC selfs tot minder as 60% beperk. In provinsies soos Gauteng en die Noord-Kaap, waar die ANC se greep op die mag die minste is, kan ons genoeg stemme kry om koalisieregerings te skep. As elke DA-kieser in die Wes-Kaap opdaag, kan ons die provinsie met 'n volstrekte meerderheid wen.

Die ANC is magshonger. Hy wil selfs meer as 'n tweederde-meerderheid hê. Op Woensdag het Julius Malema, die verspotte president van die ANC se Jeugliga, in een van sy tipiese fascistiese uitbarstings by die Universiteit van Kaapstad studente aangesê om die ANC "met 'n meerderheid van drie derdes" weer aan bewind te plaas. Hy het bloot nageaap wat Gwede Mantashe, die ANC se sekretaris-generaal, vroeër in die verkiesingsveldtog gesê het. Sy woorde was: "Ons wil nie 'n tweederde-meerderheid hê nie, ons wil in elke provinsie, met inbegrip van die Wes-Kaap, 'n driederde-meerderheid hê."

Malema glo Zuma is "onstuitbaar". Hy het Zuma 'n "biologiese tsoenami" genoem. Dis onsin. As elke DA-ondersteuner op 22 April gaan stem, kan ons verhoed dat die "biologiese tsoenami" verwoesting in Suid-Afrika saai.

Dit staan vas: as die ANC 'n meerderheid van twee derdes kry, met Zuma as President, gaan daar ernstige gevolge wees. Mnr. Zuma het geen begrip van konstitusionalisme nie, al is dit die rots waarop ons demokrasie gebou is. Hy het al dikwels gesê die ANC is belangriker as die Grondwet, dat opposisiepartye geen outomatiese bestaansreg het nie, en dat die magte van die Konstitusionele Hof hersien moet word omdat die regters "nie God" is nie. Zuma is die soort leier wat 'n regering op die pad na baantjies vir boeties, korrupsie en kriminalisering plaas - die pad wat uiteindelik in 'n mislukte staat uitloop. Ons het reeds die bewyse hiervan gesien.

Tot dusver het die heerserskliek in die ANC die Skerpioene ontbind, Vusi Pikoli, die vorige nasionale Direkteur van Openbare Vervolgings (NDOV), ontslaan, die vroegtydige vrylating van Zuma se weldoener, Schabir Shaik, uit die tronk bewimpel, en druk op Mokotedi Mpshe, die waarnemende NDOV, geplaas om aanklagte teen Zuma te laat vaar. Al dié stappe is gedoen om Zuma en sy kliek te beskerm.

Dit is dus duidelik dat niks Zuma sal stuit om die Grondwet en die oppergesag van die reg te ondermyn om homself en sy kliek te verryk en hulle teen vervolging te beskerm nie.

Gister het die Kabinet aangekondig dat hy die konsep van 'n Wysigingswet op die 17de Wysiging van die Grondwet goedgekeur het. Dit sal die nasionale regering in staat stel om plaaslike regerings se magte oor te neem. Dié Wetsontwerp sal nou na die Parlement toe gaan, en as die ANC op 22 April 'n meerderheid van twee derdes kry, sal hy die Wetsontwerp in die Parlement deurdruk. As dit bekragtig word, sal die ANC die wet inspan om die mandaat van 'n verkose plaaslike owerheid sterk aan bande te lê, veral waar die ANC nié regeer nie, en waar plaaslike owerhede heel tereg weier om ANC-beleid in te stel. Die Kabinet se goedkeuring van die wetsontwerp kom twee dae nadat ANC-woordvoerders uitdruklik ontken het dat só 'n wetsontwerp bestaan.

'n Meerderheid van twee derdes sal die ANC die mag gee om ander dreigemente uit te voer. Die ANC het reeds gedreig om eiendomsregte terug te trek, persvryheid te ondermyn en te sorg dat die howe bloot 'n uitbreiding van die ANC word - net soos grondwet-instellings soos die Openbare Beskermer en die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag reeds deur kaderontplooiing uitbreidings van die ANC geword het.

Landswyd is die DA die enigste party wat 'n mens kan vertrou om te sorg dat Zuma se kliek sy mag nie misbruik om die Grondwet te wysig nie. Ons ding egter nie net nasionaal in hierdie verkiesing mee nie. Ons neem ook in al nege provinsies deel. Daar is 'n uitstekende kans dat ons die Wes-Kaap sal verower, en daar is ook 'n moontlikheid dat ons in een of twee ander provinsies koalisieregerings sal kan skep.

Ons moet op provinsiale vlak die mag in hande kry, want dan sal ons kan bewys watter verskil ons alternatiewe visie, beginsels en beleid in die praktyk vir almal maak, net soos ons dit bewys het waar ons op die vlak van plaaslike regering gewen het. Dit is die doeltreffendste rol wat ons kan speel, nie net waar ons aan die stuur staan nie, maar vir die hele land, terwyl ons die proses van nasionale politieke herrangskikking deurvoer.

As ons in die Wes-Kaap wen, sal ons byvoorbeeld kan bewys wat samewerkende regering tussen plaaslike owerhede en 'n provinsie kan bereik. Albei regeringsfere is op talle manier nóú verweef, en ons kan uitsonderlike resultate bereik as ons almal dieselfde kant toe beur, in plaas van in teenoorgestelde rigtings.

As ons op provinsiale vlak die mag in hande kry, beteken dit ook ons kan die volgende stap op die pad van ons politieke reis neem. Dié reis het in 2006 begin toe die DA in die Stad Kaapstad en ander plaaslike owerhede in die Wes-Kaap aan bewind gekom het. Ons reis sal ná 22 April voortduur, want dan gaan ons vir die plaaslike verkiesings van 2011 voorberei. In dié verkiesings gaan ons stede en dorpe orals in Suid-Afrika verower. As die laaste been van dié reis sal ons in 2014 die kern van die nasionale regering uitmaak.

Ons kan sonder jou stem op Woensdag dié reis nie voortsit nie. Ons sal nie die nodige verbande kan lê om ons eindbestemming te bereik nie. En as die ANC 'n meerderheid van twee derdes kry, sal hy elke moontlike struikelblok in ons pad plaas om ons te ontspoor.

Die belangrikste verkiesing in Zimbabwe was nie verlede jaar, toe die MDC meer stemme as Mugabe se Zanu-PF gekry het nie, al is die verkiesing blatante bekook. Dit was in 2000, toe die MDC net-net met 1% van die stemme teen Zanu-PF verloor het. As elke enkele MDC-ondersteuner in daardie verkiesing gaan stem het, sou Zimbabwe se rampspoedige agteruitgang miskien nie gebeur het nie. Zimbabwe sou vandag bes moontlik die welvarende nasie van weleer gewees het, in plaas van die mislukte staat van die hede.

Dit is die verskil wat jou stem kan maak. Dit is die verskil tussen sukses en mislukking. Dié verkiesing gaan 'n keerpunt in Suid-Afrika se geskiedenis wees. Dit is trouens die belangrikste verkiesing ná 1994, want ons keuse gaan bepaal of die land 'n suksesvolle demokrasie word (en dit is verloklik binne ons bereik), of die afwaartse spiraal na 'n mislukte staat gaan voortsit.

In 'n demokrasie kry die kiesers die regering wat hulle verdien. Suid-Afrika se toekoms lê komende Woensdag in die hande van elke individuele kieser. Een stem kan 'n oorwinning beteken, of 'n nederlaag. Tien jaar van nou af gaan dit vir almal klinkklaar wees dat dit in dié verkiesing reg was om vir die DA te stem. Maar dan gaan dit te laat wees. Doen dit dus nóú.

Why You Should Vote DA

From SA Today 17 April 2009

Go out and vote on Wednesday 22 April!

Every single registered voter who supports the DA must go out and vote in the election on Wednesday. Your vote is critical: it could be the vote that tips the scales. The mathematics are simple: the more DA voters turn out relative to ANC voters, the better our chances are of stopping Jacob Zuma from getting the two-thirds majority he needs to change the Constitution.

Voter turnout makes a huge difference to the election result in our proportional representation electoral system. One political analyst uses the analogy of a birthday party to explain the impact of turnout. On your birthday, you buy a cake and have a party for ten people. If everyone comes, each gets one tenth of the cake. If only five attend, each gets one fifth of the cake. This means that each of the five friends who come to the party gets a slice of cake double the size of what they would have got, because the other five stayed away. In the same way, all voters who vote in an election make up the 100% representational tally which is then divided up proportionately among parties. If DA voters stay away in higher numbers than ANC supporters, the effect is to increase the proportional power of the ANC vote. And vice-versa.

In previous elections, differential turn-out has benefited the ANC. This means that more ANC voters than opposition voters turned out to vote. And that proportionately boosted their tally.

Turnout will be decisive on Wednesday. Our own internal research shows that if every DA supporter goes to vote, and if more DA voters turn out relative to ANC voters, we will keep the ANC below a two-thirds majority nationally and we could even drive the ANC below 60%. In provinces like Gauteng and the Northern Cape, where the ANC's grip on power is weakest, if every DA voter turns out, we could win enough votes to be able to form coalition governments. In the Western Cape, if every DA voter turns out, we could win the province outright.

The ANC is power-hungry. It wants even more than a two-thirds majority. On Wednesday, in one of his stock fascist tirades, the imbecilic President of the ANC Youth League, Julius Malema, told students at the University of Cape Town to return the ANC to power with "a three-thirds majority". He was merely parroting ANC Secretary-General, Gwede Mantashe, who earlier in the election campaign said, "We don't want a two-thirds majority; we want a three-thirds majority in any province including the Western Cape". Malema believes Zuma is "unstoppable". He referred to him as a "biological tsunami". That is untrue. If every DA supporter goes to the polls on 22 April, we can prevent the "biological tsunami" from wreaking devastation on South Africa.

Make no mistake: if the ANC gets a two-thirds majority with Zuma as President, the consequences will be serious. Mr Zuma has no understanding of constitutionalism, which is the bedrock of our democracy. He has often said that the ANC is more important than the Constitution, that opposition parties have no automatic right to exist, and that the powers of the Constitutional Court should be reviewed because judges are "not God". Zuma represents the kind of leaders that take governments down the path of cronyism, corruption and criminalisation, towards the failed state. The evidence is already there.

So far, the ruling clique in the ANC has disbanded the Scorpions; fired the former National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Vusi Pikoli; engineered the premature release from prison of Zuma's benefactor, Schabir Shaik; and pressured the acting NDPP, Mokotedi Mpshe, to drop the charges against Zuma. All these steps were taken to shield Zuma and his cronies.

This makes it clear that Zuma will stop at nothing to undermine the Constitution and the rule of law to enrich himself and his cabal, and protect them from prosecution.

Yesterday, the Cabinet announced that it had approved the draft Constitution 17th Amendment Bill, which empowers national government to usurp powers from local government. The Bill will now go to Parliament, and if the ANC gets a two-thirds majority on 22 April, it will force the Bill through Parliament.
If it is enacted, the law will be used by the ANC to severely limit the mandate of an elected local government, especially where the ANC does not govern and where local authorities legitimately refuse to implement ANC policies. The Cabinet approval of the Bill came two days after ANC spokespersons categorically denied the existence of such a Bill.

A two-thirds majority will give the ANC the power to act on other threats.
The ANC has already threatened to revoke property rights, undermine press freedom and make the courts an extension of the ANC - just as constitutional institutions such as the Public Protector and the National Prosecuting Authority have been turned into extensions of the ANC through cadre deployment.

Nationally, the DA is the only party that can be trusted to stop Zuma's clique from abusing its power to change the Constitution. But we are not only contesting this election nationally. We are contesting it in all nine provinces, too. There is an excellent chance that we will win the Western Cape, and also a possibility that we may be able to form coalition governments in one or two other provinces.

We must win power at provincial level, because this will enable us to demonstrate the difference that our alternative vision, principles and policies make in practice, for everyone -just as we have demonstrated where we have won at local government level. This is the most effective role we can play, not only where we govern, but for our country as a whole, as we undertake the process of national political realignment.

Winning power in the Western Cape, for example, will allow us to show what co-operative governance between local authorities and a province can achieve. Both spheres are closely inter-linked in many ways and we can attain exceptional outcomes if we all pull together, rather than in opposite directions.

Winning power provincially also means that we can take the next step in our political journey. That journey started in 2006 when the DA won the City of Cape Town and other local authorities in the Western Cape. Our journey will continue after 22 April, as we prepare to contest the 2011 local government elections, in which we will win cities and towns across South Africa. At the end of the final leg of our journey, we will form the core of national government in 2014.

Without your vote on Wednesday, we cannot continue this journey. We will not make the connection we need to reach our final destination. And if the ANC gets a two-thirds majority, it will throw every obstacle it can onto the track to derail us.

The most important election in Zimbabwe was not last year when the MDC won more votes than Mugabe's Zanu-PF, despite the election being blatantly rigged. It was in 2000, when the MDC narrowly lost to Zanu-PF by 1% of the vote. If every MDC supporter had gone out to vote in that election, Zimbabwe's catastrophic slide may have been halted. Today Zimbabwe might have been the prosperous nation it once was, instead of the failed state it has become.

That is the difference your vote makes. It is the difference between success and failure. This election will be a defining moment in South Africa's history. In fact, it is the most important election since 1994, because the choice we make will determine whether our country becomes a successful democracy, which is tantalisingly within our reach, or continues the downward spiral towards a failed state.

In a democracy, voters get the government they deserve. The future of South Africa lies in the hands of every individual voter this Wednesday. One vote can win it - or lose it. In ten years time it will be obvious to everyone that voting for the DA in this election was the right thing to do. By then it will be too late. So do it now.

Decision to recall Mbeki taken to settle political scores

HELEN ZILLE

LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE

The ANC National Executive Committee’s decision to “recall” President Mbeki is motivated by revenge to settle political scores. It has nothing to do with the interests of the people of South Africa.
The ANC has turned its internal battles into a crisis for South Africa. ANC factionalism has long undermined government’s ability to deliver, and it now threatens to destabilise the entire country.
The move is clearly an attempt to find the ‘political solution’ to Jacob Zuma’s legal problems that his supporters have been calling for. Replacing President Mbeki with a Zuma proxy will open the way for them to ensure that he does not have to face a court of law to answer the 783 allegations of corruption against him. If Zuma is put above the law it will do more to undermine the Constitution than anything else.
It is untenable for Jacob Zuma to assume the Presidency without being acquitted of these charges by a court of law. Judge Nicholson’s judgment was not an acquittal.
The DA looks forward to the 2009 election, when the people of South Africa, rather than the ANC, get to choose South Africa’s next president. People are sick and tired of the factionalism in the ANC and the abuse of state institutions for factional advantage.
The DA will offer South Africa a clear alternative to the ANC: A party that places the rule of law, the Constitution and the interests of South Africa before internal power struggles.

The Zuma verdict: What now?

SA Today - The Weekly Newsletter by Helen Zille, Leader of the DA

As a party that upholds the rule of law and the Constitution, the DA respects the Pietermartizburg High Court’s verdict, based on a legal technicality, to set aside the decision to prosecute Jacob Zuma on fraud and corruption charges. The Court ruled on the basis that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) did not allow Zuma to make representations before it decided to reinstate the charges against him – as it was required to do by the Constitution.
An unintended consequence of the judgment is that some of Jacob Zuma’s supporters may conclude that their intimidatory and violent behaviour influenced the judge’s decision. They must understand that their behaviour had no influence at all on the judgment. They must also understand that the verdict does not absolve Zuma of guilt.
It is significant that Judge Nicholson stressed that this verdict was not a judgment on Zuma’s guilt or innocence. This means that we are still no closer to knowing whether Zuma is innocent or guilty of the corruption charges brought against him. The DA will not rest until this is resolved.
This is why the DA reiterates its call for a full judicial commission of inquiry into the arms deal, headed by a retired judge nominated by the Chief Justice. The truth must out and justice must be served. No person implicated in arms deal corruption deserves to escape the due process of law.
We have also called for Parliament to be dissolved and for a fresh election to be held – in light of Judge Nicholson’s statement that he was “not convinced that the applicant [Zuma] was incorrect in averring political meddling in his prosecution”. There are further statements in the judgment that can only lead to the inference that, under President Thabo Mbeki’s tenure, instruments of state were abused for political purposes in the ANC’s factional struggles for control.
This means that Mbeki, and power brokers aligned to him, have undermined the Constitution. It is untenable that he remain President under such circumstances.
But the dissolution of Parliament could result in an equally untenable situation, because it would merely clear the way for Zuma to become the President with a heavy cloud still hanging over his head. Voters cannot exercise an informed choice under these circumstances.
The factional battles in the ANC, and the ruling party’s abuse of the Constitution, have put South Africa between a rock and a hard place.
That is why two things must happen in the interests of the country: Mbeki must step down as President, and Zuma must withdraw as a candidate for the Presidency until he has had his day in court, and his guilt or innocence has been established. Until these men put the country before their own interests, South Africa will continue to be dragged down by the unresolved consequences of the arms deal scandal.
The upside of the judgment is that it nullifies the demand by Zuma’s supporters for a political rather than a legal solution. A political deal would have had profound consequences for the future of our constitutional democracy because it would have placed an accused above the law, on the basis of his political status. The question of a political solution cannot be revived, even if the NPA decides to appeal the High Court judgment.
The judgment also provides proof to Zuma’s supporters, if any were necessary, that the judiciary is impartial and will rule according to the law. It is now incumbent upon them to demonstrate their respect for the judiciary when judgments go against their political preferences. If Zuma has his day in court, as we believe he must in the interests of the country, his supporters will have no reason to believe that he won’t have a fair trial.
Our judiciary has shown that it will not be complicit in power abuse. The Constitutional Court’s action against Judge Hlophe shows this, as does the ruling two weeks ago that the Erasmus Commission of Inquiry was unlawful and unconstitutional.
I have already unpacked the importance of that judgment for constitutional democracy, and will not repeat myself here, suffice it to say that the verdict filled me with renewed hope for the future of our country. It showed that the Constitution can successfully be defended against the ANC’s abuse of power, and that the courts have the muscle to check such abuses.
That sets an important precedent for the future, and it also shows that, institutionally, the judiciary will not be swayed by powerful politicians. Institutions are the bedrock of constitutional democracy; without them, the entire edifice crumbles. As we move forward, all South Africans – Zuma’s supporters included – should take heart that we have a robust and impartial judiciary. This gives us hope for the future.

You can subscribe to this e-newsletter free of charge at http://www.da.org.za/

Die Zuma-uitspraak - Wat Nou?

SA Vandag - Die Weeklikse Nuusbrief deur Helen Zille, Leier van die DA

Die DA is ’n party wat die oppergesag van die reg en die Grondwet sterk steun, en respekteer dus die uitspraak in die Pietermaritzburgse Hoërhof om – op grond van ’n regstegniese punt – die besluit om Jacob Zuma weens bedrog en korrupsie te vervolg, tersyde te stel. Die Hof se uitspraak was daarop gegrond dat die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag (NVG) Zuma nie toegelaat het om vertoë te rig voordat hy besluit het om die aanklagte teen hom weer in te stel nie. Kragtens die Grondwet moes hy dit gedoen het.
’n Onvoorsiene gevolg van die uitspraak is dat sommige van Zuma se ondersteuners dalk die gevolgtrekking sal maak dat hul intimiderende en gewelddadige optrede die regter se beslissing beïnvloed het. Hulle moet verstaan dat hul gedrag hoegenaamd geen invloed op die uitspraak gehad het nie. Hulle moet ook verstaan dat die uitspraak Zuma nie van enige skuld onthef nie.
Dit is belangrik dat regter Nicholson beklemtoon het dat die uitspraak geen oordeel oor Zuma se skuld of onskuld inhou nie. Dit beteken ons weet nog steeds nie of Zuma ten opsigte van die aanklagte van korrupsie teen hom skuldig of onskuldig is nie. Die DA sal sy bes doen om dié kwessie tot ’n spits te dryf.
Dit is waarom die DA sy beroep op ’n volle regterlike kommissie van ondersoek na die wapentransaksie, met 'n oudregter wat deur die Hoofregter benoem word aan die hoof daarvan, herhaal. Ons moet die waarheid vasstel, en geregtigheid moet seëvier. Niemand wat by die wapentransaksie-korrupsie betrek word, moet aan ’n behoorlike regsproses ontsnap nie.
Ons het ook gevra dat die Parlement ontbind moet word, en dat ’n verkiesing uitgeroep moet word weens regter Nicholson se verklaring dat hy “nie oortuig is dat die aansoeker (Zuma) verkeerd was om aan te voer dat daar politieke inmengery by sy vervolging was nie”. Daar is nog verklarings in die uitspraak wat ’n mens maar net kan laat aflei dat staatsinstellings in pres. Mbeki se ampstermyn vir politieke doeleindes misbruik is terwyl faksies om beheer gebots het.
Dit beteken dat Mbeki, en smouse van mag wat aan hom verbonde was, die Grondwet ondermyn het. Dit is onhoudbaar dat hy in sulke omstandighede steeds die President kan wees.
Die ontbinding van die Parlement sal egter ’n ewe onhoudbare situasie skep, want dit sal bloot die weg vir Zuma baan om president te word terwyl daar steeds ’n donker wolk bo sy kop hang. Kiesers kan in sulke omstandighede geen ingeligte keuse maak nie.
Die faksiegevegte binne-in die ANC, en die regerende party se misbruik van die Grondwet, beteken dat Suid-Afrika tussen twee meulstene vasgevang is.
Dit is waarom twee dinge in belang van die land moet gebeur: Mbeki moet as President bedank, en Zuma moet hom as Presidentskandidaat onttrek totdat hy in ’n hof verhoor is en sy skuld of onskuld bewys het. Suid-Afrika sal steeds deur die onafgehandelde gevolge van die wapentransaksieskandaal gerem word totdat dié mans die land se belange voor hul eie plaas.
Die positiewe sy van die uitspraak is dat dit eise deur Zuma se ondersteuners vir ’n politieke eerder as ’n regsoplossing tot niet maak. ’n Politieke oplossing sou baie ernstige gevolge vir die toekoms van ons konstitusionele demokrasie gehad het, want dit sou ’n beskuldige op grond van sy politieke status bo die wet geplaas het. Die kwessie van ’n politieke oplossing kan nie weer opgediep word nie, al besluit die NVG om teen die Hoërhof se uitspraak appèl aan te teken.
Die uitspraak bewys ook aan Zuma se ondersteuners, as hulle enige bewyse nodig gehad het, dat die regbank onpartydig is en aan die hand van die reg uitsprake lewer. Hulle moet nou hul respek vir die regbank bewys wanneer uitsprake nie hul politieke voorkeure weerspieël nie. As Zuma sy dag in die hof beleef, en ons glo dít is in die land se belang, sal sy ondersteuners geen rede hê om te glo dat hy nié ’n regverdige verhoor sal beleef nie.
Ons regbank het bewys dat hy nie aan magsmisbruik aandadig sal wees nie. Die Konstitusionele Hof se geding teen regter Hlope toon dit, net soos die uitspraak van twee weke gelede dat die Erasmus-kommissie van Ondersoek onwettig en ongrondwetlik was.
Ek het reeds oor die belangrikheid van daardie uitspraak vir konstitusionele demokrasie uitgewei, en gaan my nie hier herhaal nie, behalwe om te sê dat daardie uitspraak my weer hoop vir ons land se toekoms gegee het. Dit het bewys dat die Grondwet met welslae teen die ANC se magsmisbruik verdedig kan word, en dat die howe sterk genoeg is om sulke misbruike in toom te hou.
Dit skep ’n belangrike voorbeeld vir die toekoms, en bewys ook dat die regbank as instelling hom nie deur magtige politici laat beïnvloed nie. Instellings maak die kern van ’n konstitusionele demokrasie uit: daarsonder verkrummel die hele bouwerk.
Terwyl ons vorentoe beweeg, moet alle Suid-Afrikaners – ook Zuma se ondersteuners – moed skep omdat ons ’n sterk en onpartydige regbank het. Dit gee ons hoop vir die toekoms.

Gaan na www.da.org.za om gratis vir hierdie e-nuusbrief in te skryf.