Like us

Thursday, July 2, 2015

The top ten Julius Malema quotes

The top ten Julius Malema quotes

The top ten Julius Malema quotes
As Malema and the Economic Freedom Fighters are dismissed from the National Assembly merely weeks into the new parliamentary session, we’ve compiled some unique pearls of wisdom from the revolutionary leader, who forever has changed the way we look at berets…
Causing considerable outrage after his first parliamentary speech, ‘Juju’ and the EFF were booted out of parliament and will be facing disciplinary action after Malema accused the ANC of being behind the 2012 massacre at Lonmin’s Marikana mine in Rustenburg.
Malema had broken several parliamentary rules of conduct already before delivering his accusations against the ANC, causing National Council of Provinces chairperson Thandi Modise to have the EFF escorted out of parliament under great commotion.
This wasn’t, however, the first occasion on which Julius Malema managed to create controversy; known as the enfant terrible of South Africa’s democracy, Malema’s quotes, soundbites and one-liners often beggar belief and cause outrage. Love him or hate him, ‘Juju’ knows how to stir up a debate, even if his English grammar skills may not always meet the highest of standards.
So here’s a “best of Julius Malema” to spoil your day and think about what SA’s future may look like if it were left in Malema’s hands; chances are, the EFF and the ANC may yet reconcile, giving Jacob Zuma his coveted two-third majority needed to push any draconian law through parliament.
JUJU’s views on being kicked out of the ANC Youth League (and condoms):
“We are used like toilet paper that is flushed in the toilet. We are used like condoms — those who use condoms will know how condoms work, they use them and they throw them somewhere else.”
JUJU’s impression of the Democratic Alliance (DA):
I only debate with serious political youth formations. Not a group of the racist Helen Zille’s garden boys.”
JUJU’s esteem on former DA Parliamentary Leader Lindiwe Mazibuko:
“She is a tea girl for the madam – she must stay there in the kitchen.”
malema parliamentJUJU’s perspectives on land redistribution:
“Afrikaner farmers have only one passport. They have nowhere to go.”
JUJU’s tips on how to save on E-tolls:
“You must never buy an E-Tag, when they stop you and ask you your E-Tag, simply show them your red beret.”
JUJU’s vision on Capitalism:
“Because Capitalists got some small mentality. Capitalists suffers from the mind of a rat. They think if there is going to be an uprising [it] is only the ANC which is going to be overthrown. They don’t know that we will start with them.”
JUJU’s strategy on combatting the Boko Haram terrorist threat in Nigeria:
“You can fight a good fight without engaging in stupid tactics that undermine the intelligence of African people. […] Let us not reduce our political battles and grievances into kidnapping of beautiful, innocent young girls. Whatever the grievance in Nigeria, it can fought through elections.”
JUJU’s instructions on how be a good journalist:
“You behave or else you jump.”
JUJU’s insights on the United States:
“They can’t think. They don’t know politics. Every year you are bombing this or that nation, because of your thirstiness for blood. We want to ask a simple question to the imperialists. Are you not tired of seeing blood every year? You blood thirsty imperialists.”
JUJU’s response to being threatened with disciplinary procedures in parliament:
“Chair, when police reduce crime you come here and say the ANC has reduced crime. When police kill people, you don’t want us to come here and say the ANC government has killed people. That is inconsistent, honourable chair.”

If you want to see more entertaining dysfunction – African style – here are some additional links to tickle your funny bones:

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Kunene quits EFF




Kenny Kunene (Picture: Sapa)

Johannesburg – The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has confirmed the resignation of businessman Kenny Kunene from their party.

"The central command team found him a very great person to work with, and so did many in the rank and file," EFF spokesperson Mbuyiseni Ndlozi said in a statement.

"We were particularly impressed by his charisma, fearlessness, and wisdom to dissect complex challenges."

Last week the EFF denied reports that Kunene has quit the party.

"Kunene has not left the party... he has asked to be relieved of his leadership responsibilities," Ndlozi said at the time.

According to the reports, Kunene had quit as EFF head of campaigns, mobilisation, and special projects.

Ndlozi said on Monday the EFF would welcome working with Kunene in future.

"We wish him well with his future endeavours, particularly with the immediate challenge he has accepted in lending a hand in the resolution of the Cape Town gang wars," he said.

"We are, above all pleased that he remains committed in making this country work, particularly in the spirit of radical economic justice espoused in the policies of the EFF which he helped consolidate."

In July, Kunene said he was going into politics full-time as a member of the EFF, led by expelled ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema.

Kunene wrote a scathing open letter to President Jacob Zuma before joining the EFF, criticising his leadership.


- SAPA

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Malema ruling not up for review in Mangaung


Julius Malema (Sapa)

Johannesburg - The ANC will not review the decision to expel former ANC Youth League (ANCYL) president Julius Malema at its national elective congress at the end of the year, the party said on Tuesday.

"There is no provision [in the ANC constitution] for congress to deal with the matter," secretary general Gwede Mantashe told reporters in Johannesburg.

"There will be no closed session because we are reviewing the case."

He said the national congress, which is to take place in Mangaung in December, did not deal with disciplinary cases.

"It is not an appeal body," said Mantashe.

Raised from the floor

However, people could raise the issue from the floor and delegates would decide whether to debate it.

"Anyone can raise it from the floor... it won't be prohibited," he said.

Mantashe said the ANC's national executive committee (NEC) found no grounds to review the decision to expel Malema.

"After long deliberation on whether the NEC should use its discretion... overwhelmingly, the NEC agreed that there were no compelling grounds to review the decision.

"The rejecting of the review by the NEC therefore closes the chapter on this matter," he said.

Mantashe said most of the special NEC meeting, held on Monday, was spent discussing the matter.

According to the ANC's constitution, the decision of the national disciplinary committee of appeal is final, but the NEC can review the decision at its own discretion.

No ANCYL comment

ANCYL deputy president Ronald Lamola sat in on the NEC meeting as a representative for the league president in his absence.

Mantashe said the ANC could not force the ANCYL to elect a new president.

The NEC would also not review the suspension of ANCYL secretary general Sindiso Magaqa and spokesperson Floyd Shivambu.

The ANCYL on Tuesday said it had noted the outcomes of the special NEC meeting but would not comment.

Mantashe said now that the matter had been finalised all structures of the ANC and the ANCYL were expected to respect and implement the decision of the NEC.

"The special NEC resolved that the national officials and national working committee of the ANC must meet with the ANCYL leadership to assist them to deal with all the challenges they face and to take the organisation forward," he said.

Mantashe denied earlier reports that there had been fighting between NEC members regarding the decision.

'Robust' discussions

"The discussions... were robust, open and dispassionate. All members of the ANC who wanted to make a contribution were given an opportunity to so without fear or favour," he said.

The NEC's special meeting on Monday was the best attended.

He said reports that President Jacob Zuma had tried to repress the views of some NEC members were also not true.

Besides the issue of Malema, the ANC's NEC discussed the party's upcoming policy conference, which is to be held at Gallagher Estate in Midrand later this month.

Justice Minister and NEC member Jeff Radebe had been appointed to lead the drafting and resolutions committee which had started to consolidate inputs from the ANC's provinces.

Transport, accommodation and pre-accreditation for delegates had been finalised as well as the draft programme for the four-day conference, said Mantashe. The rules and procedures had been endorsed.

"We are ready as can be," he said.

- SAPA

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Malema's home besieged


Johannesburg - Julius Malema's home neighbourhood was besieged by delegates of the ANCYL provincial elective conference being held in Polokwane late on Saturday afternoon, SABC radio reported.
About 400 members gathered in the street outside Malema's home singing struggle songs in support of the suspended Youth League president.
According to the conditions of his suspension, Malema was not permitted to attend the league's provincial elective conference.
It appeared that as Malema could not come to the conference, the delegates decided to bring the conference to Malema.
Malema, who is also a member of the league's Limpopo executive committee, was expelled from the ANC in November last year for sowing divisions within the party and for bringing it into disrepute.
He was found to have done so by unfavourably comparing the leadership style of President Jacob Zuma to his predecessor Thabo Mbeki, and for remarks about regime change in Botswana.
Despite the expulsion Malema remained the youth wing's leader until all options to overturn his sentence were exhausted.
He was gagged earlier this month when the ANC's national disciplinary committee suspended him from the party after he called Zuma a dictator.
The conditions of the suspension prohibited him from exercising any duty as an ANC member, president of the ANCYL or member of the province's executive committee.
New leadership
The African National Congress Youth League were expected to elect a new Limpopo leadership at the conference on Saturday, SABC radio reported earlier.
Provincial chair Frans Moswane warned that action would be taken against ill disciplined members.
He was referring to some league members holding a parallel conference in Seshego.
Involved in that conference were members from various branches who accused the Limpopo leadership of not listening to their concerns.
Moswane told the broadcaster there was only one legitimate conference taking place in the province, which was in Polokwane.
Boy Mamabolo, the Seshego conference organiser, said it planned on electing a new "preferred" provincial leadership.
The Seshego conference was being held less than a kilometre away from Malema's home.
On Friday, some league members were kept out of the Polokwane conference registration, which was guarded by police and traffic officers.
- SAPA

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Malema appeals ANC expulsion



JOHANNESBURG Nov 24 (Reuters) - Outspoken South African politician Julius Malema on Thursday submitted a legal appeal against his five-year expulsion from the African National Congress (ANC) for bringing the ruling party into disrepute, media reported.
The ANC said this month its Youth League leader violated party rules and undermined foreign policy by calling for the overthrow of the democratically elected government of neighbouring Botswana.
ANC officials could not confirm reports on several broadcasters that Malema had submitted his appeal.
If Malema loses the appeal before a panel of senior ANC members, he would have to step down as the youth wing's leader and his political aspirations would likely be derailed.
He rose to prominence with calls to seize white-owned farm land and nationalise mines in the world's largest platinum producer, alarming investors over plans that could wreck Africa's largest economy.
The calls also won him legions of supporters from the country's poor black majority, who hope to see more wealth from the land and also envision him as a future leader.
The trial has been seen as a battle between President Jacob Zuma and Malema, a power broker who was being courted by Zuma's rivals as they lined up their bids for top posts in the party that has a stranglehold over politics.
Analysts said it is unlikely Malema can win the appeal.
If Malema is sent into the political wilderness, Zuma's path to re-election as ANC leader at a major party event next year will be far easier and could lead to a second term for him as the country's president. (Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Sophie Hares)

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Zapiro cartoons on Malema suspension



111110mg - Political Wilderness for Julius Malema?


Description & Background

ANC Disciplinary Committee suspends ANCYL President Julius Malema for five years

 - Good 01


111113st - Julius - Rebel without a Card


Description & Background

Julius Malema is suspended from the ANC for a period of five years. He can appeal both to the ANC appeal committee and the ANC NEC about the ruling. His first reaction on hearing the outcome was " we must also fight for we what we believe in. We must never apologise. The gloves are off. Let us confront them because their intention is very clear – they want to destroy the ANC Youth League."
Zapiro bases his cartoon on the well-known poster of the James Dean film "Rebel without a Cause"





Friday, November 11, 2011

Julius Malema verdict on 5-year suspension


FOR IMMEDITE RELEASE ON SAPA WIRES
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE ANC NATIONAL DISCIPLNARY COMMITTEE
HEARINGS OF
COMRADES JULIUS MALEMA, RONALD LAMOLA, PULE MABE, SINDISO
MAGAQ KENETSWE
MOSENOGI AND FLOYD SHIVAMBU
10 November 2011, Chief Albet Luthuli House, Johannesburg
PREAMBLE
The ANC Constitution requires public anouncement of the outcome of a
disciplinary proceeding.  The purpose of this media conference is to
announce the outcome of disciplinary proceedings involving comrades>Julius Malema,
Ronald Lamola, Pule Mabe, Sindiso Magaqa, Kenetswe
Mosengi and Floyd Shivambu.
Before dealing with the charges and findings, and in response to
commentary and speculation y ANC members, political commentators and the
public, the National Discplinary Committee (NDC) wishes to contextualise
the process and their considerations.
1.  THE ANC CONSTITUTION
1.    In terms of the ANC Cnstitution the NDC hears and decides cases
referred to it by the ANCNational Officials, NWC, or the NEC.
2.    On 16 August 2011, the ANC Natonal Officials, properly empowered
in terms of the ANC Constitution,charged comrades Julius Malema, Ronald
Lamola, Pule Mabe, Sindiso Magaqa and Kenetwe Mosenogi for violations of
the ANC Constitution.
3.    In term of the ANC Constitution the Chief National Presenter
represents and presents the case of the ANC at a hearing of the DC and
any person faced with disciplinary proceedings is entitled to be
epresented by a member in good standing.
4.    Reasonable time was affoded to those charged and their
representatives to prepare themselves for the heaings scheduled over the
period 30 August to 6 November 2011.
5.    Based on the facts and evidence presented the NDC has made a ruling
anddecided on penalties
6.    Those charged have been advised of the ruling and the pealties,
with reasons, and they have been advised of teir right to appeal to the
National Disciplinary Committee of Appeal.
Th NDC is accordingly satisfied that disciplinary proceedings were
properly initiated and that proper process ws followed.
2.  PREVAILING CIRCUMSTANCES DURING THE HEARING
The NC¹s Constitution and Code of Conduct require members of the ANC to
respect the Cnstitution and structures of the ANC and to place theirenergies and skills at the disposal of the organisation.
Prior to the commenceent of the disciplinary hearings, those charged,
together with other national leaders of th ANC Youth League addressed
meetings of the ANC Youth League throughout the country urging their
memers to support those charged.
A specific call was made on 23 August 2011 by the ANC Yoth League
Secretary General that "All young people in South Africa must ome out in
full support of our leaders, because they are being charged for
championing our demands of free education and te nationalisation of
mines."  This call was followed by further calls or support for those
charged.
At he commencement of the hearing on 30 August 2011 there were
unprecedentedviolent demonstrations outside Luthuli House causing
disruption and chaos n the City of Joburg.
Throughout the hearing statements have been made on public platforms, by
some ofse charged, containing allegations and innuendo about the
process of the dsciplinary hearing, ulterior motives and predetermined
outcomes of the hearing
The rulings an penalties decided on by the NDC are notdetermined by the
circumstances and factors prevailing during the hearing. The NDC would
like to remind all ANC members and leaders that the NC is a structure
appointed by the NEC of the ANC tasked with the responsibility to
consider any violation of the ANC constitutionbased on the evidence
before it.  The rulings and penalties are determied by the NDC in
private, whereafter the outcome of the disciplinary prceeding is
reported to the Secretary-General of the ANC and announced to the public.
3.  AIMS AND OBJECTIVES AND CHARACTER OF THE ANC
The Constitution of the ANC ses out its aims and objectives and
character in the preamble and in the rules of the Constitution.  In
particular, the preamble to the constitutin affirms that
³...the fundamentl goal of the ANC remains to construct a united,
non-racial, non-sexist,democratic and prosperous society in South Africa²
Rule 2, the aims andobjectives set out the intent of the ANC
Rule 3, which describes the haracter of the ANC, contains clauses
particularly pertinent to the charges considered:
³3.4 TheANC shall, in its composition and functioning, be democratic,
non-racial and non-sexist and against any form of racial, tribalistic orethnic exclusivism or chauvinism.
3.5 While striving for the maximum unity of purpose and functioning, the
ANC willrespect the linguistic, cultural and religious diversity of its
members.
3.6 Th ANC will support the emancipation of women, combat sexism and
ensure that the voice of women is fully heard in the organisation and
that women are properly represented at all levels.
3.7 The principles of freedom of speech and free circulation of ideas and
information will operate withinthe ANC.²
The NDC draws the attention of ANC members and leaders a all levels in
the organisation to these clauses in particular and reminds ANC members
and leaders of the solemn commitment made at the time of joining the ANC
to ³defend the unity and integrity of the organisation and its
principles, and combat any tendency towards disruption and factionaism².
4.  THE 3RD ANC NATIONAL GENERAL COUNCIL
The 3rd Nationl General Council (NGC) of the ANC which took place from
20 to 24 September 2010 directed tat:
³....for the ANC to remain strong and effective, discipline is a
non-egotiable that must be enforced at all levels of membership and
leadership, wthout fear or favour.²
On programmatic issues towards 2012,
³The delegates oerwhelmingly want the 3rd NGC to go down in history as
the gathering that arked a decisive turning point in tackling, arresting
and reversing the negatie tendencies that have eroded and threaten to
erode the political integrity and moral stading of the ANC among our
people. The 3rd NGC has to be remembered as the gahering that went
beyond condemning sins of incumbency and other misbehaviur such as
ill-discipline and factionalism. From now onwards, decisive action hs to
be taken by the leadership and membership to renew our movement and fight
tnaciously against any tendency to erode the character, principles, core
values and culture of the ANC.²
On Unity and Cohesion of the movement, the National General Council:
³Šcriticised the NEC for not being firm and consistent in enforcing
discipline amongall ANC members, including among NEC members.  Acts of
ill-discipline in te constituent organs of the ANC such as the Leagues
and public attacks by our Alliane partners have a direct negative
bearing on the image and integrity of the ANC in society. Inconsistent
application of rules and inactions were roundly condemned y the
commissions.  The NEC in particular and all constitutional strutures in
general are called upon to act with firmness, fairness and consistency inenorcing Rule 25 of the ANC Constitution.  There should be no confusing
ignals and messages from the leadership on matters of discipline and
integrity.²
Finaly, the Declaration of the NGC states that:
³...Council was frank in cknowledging that tendencies of ill discipline
and misconduct had set in within vaious structures of the movement.
This 3rd National General Council the delegates resolved should mark a
decisive turning pint in addressing all the negative tendencies that
eroded and pose dange of eroding the organisational integrity and very
character of the ANC.>
In this regard delegates stated without equivocation that there should>not be confusing
signals and messages from the leadership on matters of
discipline.
The responsibility to assertthe core values and principles of our
movement rests with every eader, every cadre, every member and every
supporter of the ANC.  These are, among others a steadfast adherence to
the iterests of the people, unity, selflessness, sacrifice, collective
leadship, humility, honesty, discipline, hard work, internal debate,
constructve criticism and self-criticism and mutual respect²
The current disciplinary poceeding are the first proceedings before the
NDC following theNGC and it is incumbent upon the NDC to observe the
injunction of the NGC.  Argument was presented to he NDC by those
charged that there must be consistency in dealing with maters of
discipline and the NDC concurs with this.  Accordingly, all levels of
leadershipurged to ensure that they indeed act with firmness,
fairness and consitency in addressing discipline in the organisation.
The NDC is also cogniscnt that those charged are national leaders of the
ANC Youth League and is of theiew that their leadership positions
impose on them a responsibility to conuct themselves, in all respects,
in an exemplary manner, serving as role modes to young people.
PART 2:  SUMMARY OF NDC FINDINGS
Six members f the ANC, who are also members of the National Executive
Committee of the AN Youth League, were charged with various acts of
misconduct in terms of the ANC Costitution.
Four separate hearings were held between 30 August and 6 November 211.
The charged members requested that the findings in all four (4) hearings
e made at the end of the proceedings
This morning, all six (6) respondentswere informed of the findings
against them. By agreement the findingsagainst cde Malema were presented
to his representatives.  Thereafter the outcome of the heaings were
reported to tSecretary General of the ANC. This announcement to the
public is in accordance ith  Rule 25.11 of the ANC Constitution.
The findings in the four disciplinary herings run into one hundred and
thirty six (136) pages.
The findings follow a particular format. It provides:-1.    Details of the charges
2.  The plea process
3.   Summary of evidence of all witnesses and ther cross-examination
4.    The onus of proof
5.  Determination of legalarguments raised by the respondents.
6.  Issues that the NDC had to determine
7.  The determination ofthese issues by the NDC
8.  Factors that were considered when determining an appropriate>sanction which were:-
o    the seriousness of the charge;
o    the presence of agravating factors;
o  any previous findings against the respondent;
o  the prsence of mitigating factors;
o  the concept that the sanction must take into consideration the
interests of the organisation, the respondent and society at large;
o    the concept of a graduated approach to sanctioning; and
o  the sanction must fit the offence.
9.    Consideration of an appropriate sanction; and finally
10.    The sanction imposed
CROSS-CUTTING AND LEGALARGUMENTS
During the proceedings the following cross-cutting issues and legal
arguments were raised and resolved as follows:
1. Argument that the disciplinary proceedings were not validly
instituted in accordance with the ANC Constitution.
1.    The respondents argued that a resolution of this argument, if
upheld, would not only put an end to the disciplinary proceedings against
cde Malema, but also against the other members of the Youth League who
have been charged.
2.    In the NDC¹s view, this argument encompasses two aspects:-
2.1    whether the ANC Constitution makes provision for a structure known
as the ³National Officials²; and
2.2    if so, did the National Officials have the power not only to refer
but also to institute disciplinary proceedings.
3.    The Charges were instituted by the National Officials and the
existence of the National Officials as a structure or organ was disputed
by the respondents.
4.    After analysing the ANC Constitution and the Appendix, the NDC
concluded that:-
4.1     It can be inferred that an organ exists in the ANC known as the
³National Officials², which is distinguishable from the National
Executive Committee and the National Working Committee and that such
organ has the powers conferred on it in terms of Rule 25(6)(a) read with
Clause 3 of the Appendix to the Constitution.
4.2     Clause 3 of the Appendix to the ANC Constitution empowers the NDCto hear and decide cases referred to it by the National Officials.
4.3    The words, ³or the relevant body exercising its right to invoke to
disciplinary proceedings² in Rule 25.3 includes ³National Officials² when
read with the right of other organs such as the NEC to invoke
disciplinary proceedings.
     4.4 Rule 25.3 confers three rights on the National Officials viz.
€    To satisfy itself that disciplinary proceedings are warranted;
€  To decide to institute disciplinary proceedings; and
€  To refer the matter to the NDC to proceed with such
               disciplinary proceeding.
  5. The argument that the ³National Officials² does not exist and
that, if it
       existed, it could only refer and not institute disciplinary
proceedings
       was rejected.
2. The argument that the ANC Youth League is autonomous
    and therefore independent of the ANC
1.  In deciding this issue, the NDC took into account:-
€    The ANC Constitution;
€  The ANC Youth League Constitution;
€  Annexure JM 2  A life of its own: The autonomy of the ANC Youth
League (adopted at the 1991 National Congress of the ANC Youth League in
KwaNdebele); and
€    The evidence of the respondent¹s witnesses.
2. In the understanding of two of the respondent¹s witnesses the autonomy
  of the Youth League was qualified but the Youth League had the
freedom
  of organizational independence and the freedom to develop policy for
consideration and possible adoption by the ANC.
3. The Constitution of the ANC Youth League attributes the existence of
the
  Youth League to the ANC and specifically provides that it shall be
located
  within the overall structure of the ANC. This is reinforced by the
dissolution clause which provides that its assets shall vest in the
ANC
  upon dissolution.
4. The main objective of the Youth League is to support and reinforce the
  ANC and Rule 7.4 of the ANC Constitution provides a constitutional
mandate for the Youth League to achieve this objective.5. Comrade Winnie Mandela testified that the Youth League was autonomous
in every respect except financially.
6. ³Autonomous² is defined in the ANC Constitution and, in the view of
the
  NDC, the operative word in the definition is ³operate² and not the
word
  ³independently.²
7. The fact that the Youth League has chosen, in its Constitution, to be
a
  legal persona that would enable it to hold and alienate property and
enter
  into agreements does not make it independent of the ANC. These
powers,
  in the view of the NDC, speak to a degree of organizational
independence.
  This organizational independence is, in turn, circumscribed by Rule
7.4 of
  the ANC Constitution which provides that the Youth League
constitution
  shall not be in conflict with the ANC Constitution and policies of
the ANC.
8. Moreover, Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Youth League Constitution
  expressly subjects Youth League members to be sanctioned by
disciplinary committees of the ANC and the Youth League by virtue of
this
   provision, in effect, undertakes to ensure its enforcement. In the
NDC¹s
  view, this provision, on its own, detracts from the argument that the
ANC Youth League is independent.
9. In summary, if the Youth League seeks to operate outside of the ANC
  Constitution and policy, it will, in the NDC¹s view, be acting
outside the
  constitutional doctrine of legality of the ANC Constitution and
existing
  ANC policy. In other words, the ANC Youth League would be operating
unlawfully.
10. On an analysis of all the evidence, the NDC is of the view that the
  ANC Youth League, like the Womens¹ League and Veterans League, has
a degree of organizational autonomy but is not independent of the
ANC.
11. Consequently, the respondent¹s defence that the ANC Youth League is
    autonomous and therefore independent of the ANC is rejected.3. The argument that the ANC deals differently with alliance partners and
autonomous bodies and is therefore inconsistent
1. Put simply, the argument is that the ANC treats its alliance partners,
  COSATU and the SA Communist Party, differently from the Youth
League and, by virtue of this conduct, is inconsistent.
2. This argument, in the view of the NDC, is misplaced for the following
  reasons:-
€    Both COSATU and the SA Communist Party do not derive their existence
from the ANC Constitution, as is the case with the Leagues of the ANC.
€    COSATU and the SA Community Party owe their existence and
mandate to a different set of circumstances when compared with
the Youth League as set out in its own constitution.
€    COSATU and the SA Communist Party have their own
constituencies and programmes and are accountable to their
respective constituencies and not to the ANC, whereas the main
objective of the Youth League, in terms of its own constitution, is for
the purpose of reinforcing and supporting the ANC.
€    Allies come together for common purposes and the realization of
common goals. Otherwise, they remain independent in the true sense of the
word. On the other hand, the ANC Youth League, in terms of its
Constitution, owes its existence to the ANC and exists for the sole
benefit of the ANC.
3. Consequently, the NDC is of the view that the Youth League and the
   ANC¹s alliance partners are not in the same relationship with the
ANC.
4. As such, any comparison as to how the ANC relates to the Youth League
   and its alliance partners, to determine consistency, is misplaced.
5. In any event, the NDC is of the view that any value judgment about
   consistency or inconsistency can only be made over a period of time
and after evaluating a number of events. Other than a reference to
one
   incident concerning COSATU, the respondents have not provided any
evidence of incidents over a period of time to enable the NDC or any
reasonable observer to make a finding of inconsistency on the part
of the
   ANC.
4. The argument that the ANC Youth League has traditionally been militant
and therefore the conduct of the current leadership should not be judged
differently
1. The NDC agrees with this proposition and does not believe that the
  current ANC Youth League administration should act or be judged any  differently from previous administrations.
2. The common denominator is that the ANC, for most part of its
  existence since 1912, has had a Code of Conduct to regulate the
conduct
  of its members.
3. In the view of the NDC, the decision whether to discipline or not
  lies in a fine line or threshold between militancy and robust
expression on the one hand and ill-discipline on the other. Once that
  line has been crossed or threshold breached, one could expect to be
disciplined.
4. All members of the ANC, without exception, are subject to the ANC
  Constitution and its Code of Conduct. In the NDC¹s view, ill-
  discipline, in the guise of militancy and robust expression, cannot
exempt any member from being sanctioned nor can it be a licence for
reckless conduct.
5. The argument that disciplinary proceedings should not be
  used to settle political scores as provided for in Rule 25.2 of
the ANC Constitution
1. The NDC agrees that the ANC Constitution expressly prohibits
  the use of disciplinary proceedings to stifle debate, deny any
member of his or her democratic right or be used to solve private
problems.
2. Generally, whether such prohibitions are in play can be established
from
  the Charge itself.
3. For instance, if a member is charged for an utterance he or she never
  made or an act that he or she never committed but which is attributed
to
  him or her in a charge, that allegation in itself should be
sufficient for any
  disciplinary tribunal to be concerned about the legitimacy of the
charge.
4. In terms of Rule 25.2 such disciplinary tribunal is obliged to
  satisfy itself that the conduct of the charged member (act or
utterances) constitutes a violation of the ANC Constitution or
an offence affecting the organization as expressly provided in
Rule 25.2 of the Constitution.
5. In the present disciplinary hearings the respondents did not deny
making   the utterances which they were alleged to have made.
6. In the face of such formal admissions, there was no rational
  basis or need thereafter for the NDC to consider whether the
disciplinary proceedings were instituted for any illegitimate
purpose.
6. The argument that Youth League members would still retain their
membership and positions in the Youth League even if expelled from the ANC
   1. This submission was based on Rules 7.4. and 7.5 of the ANC
       Constitution which provide, inter alia, that the Youth League
will
       function as an autonomous body and that members of the ANC Youth
League over the age of 18 are expected to play a full part in
the general
       political life of the ANC.
   2. The implication of this argument, as understood by the
       NDC, is that in terms of the ANC Constitution, members of the
Youth
       League do not necessarily have to become members of the ANC.
   3. Consequently, it would follow, according to this argument, that
if a
       Youth League member is a member of the ANC, the outcome of
disciplinary proceedings against that member in his or her
capacity as
       an ANC member would not affect that member¹s membership of the
Youth League.
   4. The NDC was of the view that the argument was untenable for the
       following reasons:-
.         4.1 The issue of the Youth League¹s autonomy has been dealt
with in
             this finding  and the NDC¹s conclusion was that whilst the
             Youth League enjoys a degree of organisational
independence, it is
             not independent of the ANC.
       4.2 The Youth League Constitution specifically provides in
Article H
             that Youth League members over the age of 18 are ³obliged
to join
             the ANC².
       4.3 It follows that a Youth League member over 18 years of age
will not              be permitted to remain in the Youth League unless he or
she
             becomes a member of the ANC.
       4.4 This positive obligation to join the ANC is reinforced in
the
             Preamble of the Youth League Constitution which provides
that
             the ANC Youth League derives its existence from the
Constitution of the ANC and exists as a mass youth
formation
             of the ANC.
       4.5 Furthermore, Article 11 of the Code of Conduct of the Youth
             League, set out in Schedule A of the ANC Youth League
Constitution provides:-
             ³11.1 A disciplinary proceeding of the Youth League may
not
                      interfere with a person¹s rights and duties as a
member of
                      the ANC, unless such rights or duties are
exercised in an
                      ex-officio capacity on behalf of the Youth League.
             11.2. A person, who has been found guilty by an ANC
                      disciplinary proceeding resulting in the
imposition of the
                      penalties of suspension, temporary/forfeiture of
membership rights or expulsion, such penalties
shall have
                      the same application in all structures of the ANC
Youth League.²
       4.6 The provisions of Article 11 above explicitly postulate two
             outcomes.
4.6.1 The first, set out in 11.1, is that the outcome of disciplinary
proceedings conducted by the Youth League against any of its members will
not impact on that member¹s rights and duties as a member of the ANC. The
only exception is where that member represents the Youth League in
an ex-officio capacity in the ANC, in which event the Youth League may
exercise its right of deployment of that member by removing him
or her and nominating another member in his or her stead.
This means that the outcome of disciplinary proceedings
within the Youth League will not affect that person¹s membership
of the ANC.
4.6.2 However, the converse position set out in 11.2, subjects allmember of the ANC Youth League to be bound by the outcome of
ANC disciplinary proceedings.
4.7  In other words, it is not a defence for a Youth League
member charged by the ANC to raise the argument that a
sanction imposed by an ANC disciplinary committee would not
affect his or her status as a member of the Youth League.
4.8 The ANC Youth League, by express provision in its Constitution,
has subjected its members to and has undertaken to respect the
outcome of ANC disciplinary proceedings against ANC members
who are also Youth League members.
5. Consequently, a Youth League member, by agreeing to be bound
by the provisions of  Article 11.2, has consented to the
jurisdiction of the ANC over his or her membership of the Youth
League.
6. It also means that the Youth League itself shall be under a
constitutional obligation to give effect to any decision of an ANC
disciplinary committee which affects its members and to take all
steps necessary to ensure that the sanction is enforced.
7. The ruling of an ANC disciplinary committee against a Youth
League member is not limited to expulsion but extends to
suspensions.
8. Consequently, if the respondents, are expelled or suspended by the
ANC, that ruling would affect and be applicable to their membership of
the Youth League and they would no longer be permitted to participate
in the Youth League in any capacity.
FIRST HEARING  THE HEARING INVOLVING FIVE MEMBERS
In this hearing, comrades Julius Malema, Ronald Lamola, Pule Mabe,
Sindiso Magaqa and Kenetswe Mosenogi were charged for contravening Rule
25.5 (q) And Rule 25.5 (o) of the ANC Constitution for deliberately
disrupting a meeting of the ANC National Officials and for undermining
the Secretary General of the ANC on 8 August 2011.
Finding of the NDC
1. It is unprecedented, and untenable for obvious reasons, for a person
or
  persons to enter a meeting of the ANC National Officials, which
included
  the President and Deputy President of both the ANC and the Republic
of   South Africa, without prior invitation and permission.
2. The charges against the respondents were properly instituted by the
  ANC National Officials in terms of the ANC Constitution. Details are
set
  out in the disciplinary inquiry of comrade Julius Malema which is
incorporated as part of this finding.
3. The NDC accepts that the respondents may have harboured feelings of
  frustration, that they could have held perceptions and that they
were not being taken seriously by the National Officials. But the NDC
finds that ill-discipline is not a cure for frustration.
4. The respondents¹ act of disobeying the directive of the National
  Officials, as conveyed to them by the SG, constitutes a breach of
Rule 25.5 (o) (cc) of the ANC Constitution because such disobedience
undermined the effectiveness of the ANC as an organisation as
contemplated in that sub rule.
5. The act of going to the meeting of the National Officials, uninvited,
  constitutes a breach of Rule 25.5 (q) on the ground that such action
was
  deliberate, disrupted the meeting of the National Officials and
interfered
  with the orderly functioning of the ANC as contemplated in that rule.
6. The NDC is satisfied that the complainant has proved its case on a
  balance of probabilities and that the causal link between the
misconduct
  of the respondents and the acts of misconduct contemplated in Rules
25.5 (q) and Rule 25.5 (o)(cc) of the ANC¹s Code of Conduct has been
established.
7. Accordingly, the NDC finds the respondents guilty as charged.
Impact of the ANC disciplinary proceedings on membership of the
ANC Youth League
Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Constitution of the ANC
Youth League, this ruling is applicable to the respondents¹ membership of
the ANC Youth League.
Sanction
1. Factors taken into account for the purpose of sanctioning
€    The seriousness of the charge;
€  the presence of aggravating factors;€    any previous findings against the respondents;
€    the presence of mitigating factors;
€  the concept that the sanction must take into consideration the
interest of the ANC, the respondents and society at large;
€    the concept of a graduated approach to sanctioning; and
€    the sanction must fit the offence.
2. Consideration of an appropriate sanction
1. Like any other organisation, there is an unwritten culture of respect
in
  the ANC. One sees it in practice every day. For instance, older
members of  
  the ANC are shown respect in the organisation, irrespective of their
positions in the organisation. It is unfortunate that the respondents
did
  not respect this culture.
2. Cabinet Ministers and other key officials of government are generally
  afforded security protection, because any serious physical injury to
them,
  or even death, could have a destabilising effect on the country and
on
  government¹s ability to discharge its mandate. The respondents, as
senior
  leaders of the ANC Youth League, should have realised the security
risk
  their action posed. In this regard the misconduct of the respondents
is
  regarded as a serious offence.
3. The ANC, as a liberation movement and the ruling party of a sovereign
  state governing the lives of about 50 million people, is expected to
conduct its business in a professional manner. Discipline is
necessary for
  the ANC to function optimally. South African society and the
international
  community expect no less.
4. The NDC took the view that the respondents, as ANC members and senior
  leaders of the ANC Youth League, are expected to shine as beacons of
of the values of the ANC, and set an example to the millions of young
people in South Africa, both Black and White.
5. It is the responsibility of the Youth League leaders to represent the
hopes
  and aspirations of the youth of South Africa. The starting point on
this   journey is to acknowledge discipline as the foundation for any
intended
  programme of action.
6. As potential future leaders of South Africa, the respondents have the
  responsibility of sending a strong signal of maturity and respect for
authority. In the view of the NDC, this would be an appropriate
moment
  for the respondents to reflect and stop their ill-discipline.
7. The letter of apology from the respondents was accepted as a
mitigating
  factor.
8. Having considered all these factors, the NDC imposes the following
  sanction:-
  8.1 The membership of comrades Julius Malema, Ronald Lamola, Pule
        Mabe, Sindiso Magaqa and Kenetswe Mosenogi is suspended for
2 (two) years;
  8.2 The sanction in 8.1 above is suspended for a period of three
years
        and will be implemented if the respondents are found guilty of
any    
        contravention of the ANC¹s Code of Conduct within the said
period.
  8.3 Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the
        Constitution of the ANC Youth League, this ruling is applicable
to the
        respondents¹ membership of the ANC Youth League.
  8.4 The NDC calls on the leadership of the ANC to ensure the
mentorship
and nurturing of the ANC Youth League leadership as part of remedial
action.
The respondents have the right to appeal to the NDCA within 14 days.
SECOND HEARING  THE HEARING INVOLVING CDE SINDISO MAGAQA
The respondent, comrade Sindiso Magaqa, was charged for contravening Rule
25.5(o) of the Constitution of the African National Congress by, in a
pre-meditated manner, prejudicing the integrity or repute of the
organisation, by making derogatory remarks about an NEC member thereby
creating division within the ranks or membership of the ANC.
The alleged act of misconduct was that on 2 August, 2011 he issued in the name of the ANC Youth League a derogatory statement regarding Comrade
Malusi Gigaba, a member of the NEC and Cabinet minister.
Comrades Shivambu and Tulelo testified on behalf of the respondent.  The
respondent did not testify.
FINDING OF THE NDC
After considering all relevant factors, the NDC finds as follows:-
1. Comrade Shivambu contradicted himself in a material respect regarding
  a meeting that had been arranged between comrade Gigaba and the
Youth League.
2. Comrade Shivambu¹s evidence about having confirmed what comrade
  Gigaba had said at the American Chamber of Commerce is hearsay.
3. The contents of the statement was derogatory and potentially
defamatory
  in nature and constituted an unwarranted and unjustified attack on
the
  person of comrade Gigaba;
4. As such, there was no obligation on the respondent to issue the
  statement in his official capacity as Secretary General of the ANC
Youth
  League.
5. The respondent would have had a valid reason or excuse not to issue
the
  statement.
6. The fact that the respondent elected to issue the statement in his
name
  through his office as Secretary General shows that he acted with no
consideration of the consequences of his action.
7. By electing to issue the statement, with full knowledge that its
contents
  were derogatory of comrade Gigaba, the respondent¹s conduct was
unreasonable and in conflict with the ANC Constitution.
8. The respondent, by conduct, associated himself with the contents of
  the statement and consequently attracted personal liability.
Moreover,
  comrade Shivambu testified that the statement was prepared by the
leadership of the ANC Youth League, of which the respondent is part.
9. Even if the statement was issued in the name of the respondent without
  his knowledge (which is not the case), there is no evidence   before the NDC that the respondent had taken any immediate corrective
action to absolve himself from liability after establishing that the
statement had been issued.
10. It is self-evident that the issuing of the statement by the
respondent:-
   10.1 was prejudicial to the integrity and repute of the ANC and its
           personnel (comrade Gigaba);
   10.2 created or had the likely effect of creating division within
the ranks
           of the ANC and in the ANC¹s relationship with the ANC Youth
League since the respondent, comrade Gigaba and the National
Executive Committee members of the Youth League are all
members
           of the ANC;
   10.3 undermined the effectiveness of the ANC as an organisation in
that
           the respondent¹s misconduct undermined comrade Gigaba¹s
position as a Minister, deployed by the ANC, within the
country and
           internationally; and
   10.4 impeded comrade Gigaba¹s activities in his capacity as a
Minister of
           State and, by implication, the activities of the ANC as an
organisation.
11. On the evidence, the NDC finds the respondent personally liable for
    misconduct.
12. The NDC is of the view that the complainant has proved the misconduct
    of the respondent on a balance of probabilities.
13. The NDC is satisfied that the causal link between the respondent¹s
    misconduct and the act of misconduct contemplated in Rule
25.5(o) of the ANC Constitution has been established.
14. For the reasons set out above, the NDC is of the view that the
defence of
    the respondent that he issued the statement in his official
capacity as
    Secretary General and as a representative or agent of the ANC Youth
League and was therefore not personally liable, cannot be sustained.
15. Accordingly, the respondent is found guilty as charged.
16. On 6th November 2011 the respondent¹s representative specifically     requested the NDC to decide whether the disciplinary proceedings
were validly instituted in accordance with the ANC Constitution.
17. The argument was considered in the disciplinary inquiry of comrade
    Julius Malema and the finding in that case viz. ³the respondent¹s
argument that the National Officials does not exist and that, if it
existed,
    it could only refer and not institute disciplinary proceedings is
rejected²
    is incorporated in this finding.
The impact of ANC disciplinary proceedings on membership of the
ANC Youth League
1. Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Constitution of the ANC
  Youth League, this ruling is applicable to the respondent¹s
membership of the ANC Youth League.
Sanction
1. Factors taken into account for the purpose of sanctioning
€    The seriousness of the charge;
€  the presence of aggravating factors;
€  any previous finding against the respondents;
€  the presence of mitigating factors;
€  the concept that the sanction must take into consideration the
interest of the ANC, the respondent and society at large;
€    the concept of a graduated approach to sanctioning; and
€    the sanction must fit the offence
2. Consideration of an appropriate sanction
1. The Ministry of Public Enterprises is a critical portfolio in South
Africa¹s
  quest to attract foreign and local investment for infrastructure
development and job creation. The respondent, as a member of the NEC
  of the ANC should have been familiar with programmes of the ANC and
government in this regard and should have realised the consequences
of
  his action and its impact on society.
2. The unwarranted attack on the person of comrade Gigaba belittled and
  had the effect of potentially defaming him as a person. At an
operational
  level the attack painted a picture of someone who was ineffective,
out to
  appease the forces of imperialism and as one who did not enjoy the
confidence and political support of his comrades in the ANC. In the NDC¹s
  view, this picture would have seriously lowered comrade Gigaba¹s
esteem,
  detracted from his mandated duties as Minister of Public Enterprises
and  
  impacted negatively on the ANC.
3. In the current economic climate internationally, the securing of
foreign
  direct investment has become extremely challenging and competitive.
The
  NDC is of the view that the respondent¹s action has prejudiced
the ANC, the government and the community it serves, including a
possible negative effect on investment in South Africa.
4. The NDC has taken cognisance of the fact that the respondent¹s conduct
  not only attracted liability to himself but also created uncertainty
and
  attracted risk to the country. International and local investors
would be
  reluctant to enter into any long term investment arrangements with a
Minister of Public Enterprises who apparently did not enjoy the
support
  of the Youth League of the ANC - who could be seen as possible future
  leaders.
5. In any event any attack on a leader of the ANC and NEC member by a
  Youth League leader who is also a member of the NEC, constitutes an
act
  of ill-discipline and has the effect of creating divisions in the
organisation.
6. For these reasons the NDC considers the offence to be of a serious
  nature.
7. The respondent did not testify. Consequently, the NDC has no basis to
  establish his version and consider any mitigating factors.
8. The NDC has taken into account the finding of guilt against the
  respondent on a charge of contravening Rules 25.5(q) and 25.5(o)
(which
  finding was handed down today) and decided not to invoke the
suspension in that matter for the purpose of determining an
appropriate
  sanction in this case.
9. Having weighed and considered these factors, the NDC imposes
  the following sanction:
9.1 Cde Magaqa¹s (the respondent) membership is suspended for a period of     18 (eighteen) months.
  9.2 The sanction imposed in 9.1 above shall be suspended for a period
of
        3 (years) and will be implemented if the respondent is found
guilty of
        contravening Rule 25.5(o) of the ANC Constitution within the
said
        period.
  9.3 Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Constitution of the
        ANC Youth League, this ruling is applicable to the respondent¹s
        membership of the ANC Youth League.
  9.4 The respondent shall make a public apology to comrade Malusi
        Gigaba. Failure to do this within five (5) days after the
conclusion of
        the disciplinary processes will result in Clause 9.1 taking
immediate    
        effect.
  The respondent shall be entitled to appeal to the NDCA within 14 days.
THIRD HEARING  THE MATTER INVOLVING CDE SHIVAMBU
In this hearing, the respondent, comrade Floyd Shivambu was charged with
three instances of misconduct.
Charge One
1. The first charge was for contravening Rule 25.5 (o) aa, bb, cc and dd
of the ANC Constitution by prejudicing the integrity or repute of the
organization, its personnel or its operational capacity by impeding the
activities of the organization, creating divisions within its ranks or
membership, doing any other act which undermines its effectiveness as an
organization:
First act of misconduct
Two acts of misconduct were included in this charge
1. The first act related to the respondent repeately swearing at a
journalist on or about 12 July 2011, thereby causing harm to the
integrity and reputation of the ANC:
Second act of misconduct
2. The second act of misconduct related to the issuing of a press
statement in which, inter alia, the following is stated:
³The ANC Youth League does not believe that our position on Botswana and the approach is inconsistent with ANC policy outlook (sic);² that
³If there is anything inconsistent with ANC policy directives, it is
leaders of the ANC who associated with imperialist controlled political
parties like MDC in Zimbabwe and BDP in Botswana;² further that
³Š the ANC Youth League takes a practical programme of liberating the
people of Botswana from imperialist dominance; ² further that,
³Š the government of Botswana had openly embraced imperialismŠ²
And finally that
³The resolution of the ANCYL NEC on the Botswana Command team stands
until there is discussion with ANC Constitutional structures on what
should be the approach to the Botswana question.²
Charge Two
The second charged leveled against the respondent was for contravening
contravening Rule 25.5(i) of the Constitution of the African National
Congress by behaving in such a way as to provoke serious divisions or a
breakdown of unity in the organization;
The respondent was charged for misconduct for driving a wedge between the
spokesperson of the ANC and the ANC Officials in a press statement issued
2 August 2011. The charge is that he undermined the leadership of the ANC
and provoked serious divisions.
FINDING BY NDC ON CHARGE 1
1. First act of misconduct
1. The respondent admitted swearing at the journalist and the NDC finds  
  that the respondent uttered the foul language alleged in the Charge.
2. The respondent¹s defence that he was provoked is rejected on the
  following grounds:-
2.1 On the respondent¹s own evidence, the trigger for uttering the
profanities
    was that the journalist had called him a fool.
2.2 When compared with the respondent¹s previous encounters which taxed
    his patience, particularly being told that ³you Youth League people
are
    corrupt², the NDC finds that the respondent¹s response was, in the     circumstances, unjustified.
2.3 Moreover, on respondent¹s own evidence he uttered the profanities
after
    about 8 or 9 telephone calls from the journalist whose number he
recognised and who, at the time, spoke in a calmer voice.
3. On the respondent¹s argument that the evidence was illegally
  obtained, the NDC finds:-
3.1 The transcript of the taped telephone conversation by the journalist
was
    not used to charge the respondent, nor was it used to make a
finding or
    used to obtain evidence to secure a finding adverse to the
respondent.
3.2 The respondent admitted that he uttered the profanities which he
    considered to be unfortunate and wrong and the NDC finds him guilty
on his admission and not on the evidence of the taped telephone
conversation.
4. The NDC rejected the respondent¹s argument that he could not be
  sanctioned twice for the same offence - the so-called defence of
  double jeopardy, on the following grounds:-
4.1 The defence of double jeopardy was not raised as a special plea in
the
    proceedings. The respondent¹s reason for not doing so was that he
was
    not sure of the legalities. That may be so. But he was legally
represented.
4.2 The Youth League Constitution considers offences which damage the
    integrity of the organisation to be within the scope of offences
which are
    considered to be grave, serious and a violation of discipline, all
of which
    would warrant a disciplinary inquiry by the Youth League.
4.3 It is common cause that the Youth League did not convene a
    disciplinary inquiry but reprimanded the respondent.
4.4 The NDC finds that the sanction of reprimand was not the outcome of a
    formal disciplinary hearing by the Youth League. The defence of
double
    jeopardy is rejected.
5. The respondent¹s use of vulgar language constituted behaviour which is
a   breach of the ANC¹s Code of Conduct.
6. The NDC took the view that the media and any other third party, with
  whom the respondent as spokesperson for the Youth League
communicated with, deserved respect.
7. Irrespective of how frustrated the respondent felt, did not justify
the
behaviour that brought the ANC into disrepute.
8. Based on his admission, the NDC finds that the respondent is guilty of
  prejudicing the  repute of the ANC in contravention of Rule 25.5(o)
of the
  ANC Constitution and that the causal link between the misconduct of
the
  respondent and the act of misconduct contemplated in Rule 25.5 (o) of
the ANC Constitution has been established.
Second act of misconduct
1. The contents of the statement (Annexure E3) issued by the respondent
raised the following contentious issues and was a contravention of ANC
policy:-
        1.1 it disagreed with the ANC¹s spokesperson¹s approach and, by
              implication, the ANC¹s approach on Botswana;
        1.2 it made reference to a practical programme of the Youth
League
              to liberate the people of Botswana from imperialist
dominance;
        1.3 it referred to the BDP as a potential security threat to
the entire
              African continent;
        1.4 it expressed the belief that the ANC Youth League¹s
position on
              Botswana was not inconsistent with ANC policy;
        1.5 it stated that the ANC was acting outside its own policy
              directives by associating with imperialist-controlled
political
              parties like the MDC in Zimbabwe and BDP in Botswana;
        1.6 it suggested that the ANC was establishing strange
ideological
              trends and political relations for purposes of
convenience and               that such conduct had the potential of undermining the
integrity of the ANC as a national liberation movement;
        1.7 it issued a threat viz. that the ANC Youth League
resolution
              would stand until there was discussion with the ANC on
what
              the approach to the Botswana question should be; and
        1.8 it stated that the ANC Youth League had canvassed and
              obtained the support of continental and world youth
formations for its position on Botswana.
2. The respondent, by conduct, associated himself with the contents of
the
  statement of the ANC Youth League which was unlawful  
and unreasonable.
3. The respondent¹s act of issuing the statement, without due regard for
the
  consequences of his action and in circumstances where he was under no
obligation to issue the statement rendered him personally
liable for misconduct.
4. The NDC is satisfied that the complainant has proved its case on a
  balance of probabilities and that the causal link between the
misconduct
  of the respondent and the act of misconduct contemplated in Rule 25.5
(o) of the ANC Constitution has been established.
5. Consequently, the NDC finds the respondent guilty as charged.
Charge Two
Evidence for the complainant
Both comrades Mbete and Jackson Mthembu testified for the complainant.
In view of its finding on this Charge, the NDC believes it is unnecessary
to summarise the evidence of these comrades.
Evaluation by the NDC
1. The extent of overlap between Charges 1 and 2 is evident.
2. The NDC notes that the complainant has not sought to amend
  this Charge at any stage of the proceedings and decided to make a
finding.3. Consequently, the NDC is of the view that since the respondent has
  already pleaded to this charge, the NDC is obliged to make a finding.
Finding by NDC on Charge Two
The respondent is found not guilty on Charge Two.
Impact of the ANC disciplinary proceedings on membership of ANC
Youth League
1. Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Constitution of the ANC
  Youth League, this ruling is applicable to the respondent¹s
membership of the ANC Youth League.
2. Full details of this ruling are set out in the disciplinary inquiry
finding of
  comrade Julius Malema and are incorporated herein.
Sanction
1. Factors taken into account for the purpose of sanctioning
€    The seriousness of the charge;
€  the presence of aggravating factors;
€  any previous findings against the respondents;
€  the presence of mitigating factors;
€    the concept that the sanction must take into consideration the
interest of the ANC, the respondent and society at large;
€    the concept of a graduated approach to sanctioning; and
€  the sanction must fit the offence
2. Consideration of an appropriate sanction
2.1. First act of misconduct on Charge 1
1. Generally, a spokesperson is the face of any organisation. The NDC is
of
  the view that the respondent¹s use of vulgar language when dealing
with
  third parties brought the ANC into disrepute, is unacceptable and
constitutes a serious offence.
2. Comrade Mbete testified that she could not remember when the ANC had
  condoned such language and that it was not the first time that the
respondent had committed such an offence.3. The respondent¹s apology to the Youth League for swearing at the
  journalist was considered as a mitigating factor.
2.2. Second act of misconduct on Charge 1
1. The respondent is a senior member of the ANC Youth League and
  performs the crucial function of communicating and articulating
decisions of the NEC of the Youth League to members of the ANC Youth
League and to the public.
2. The NDC is of the view that the respondent, who is currently serving a
  second term as the spokesperson and a leader within the ANC, should
have known better.
3. The NDC is of the view that the interest of the ANC has been severely
  prejudiced by the misconduct of the respondent. Consequently, the
organisation¹s standing in inter-party and international relations
has
  been eroded and the element of trust and the ANC¹s standing, built
over
  the years, would take time to heal.
4. As the ANC is the ruling party in government, the NDC has no doubt
that
  the respondent¹s act of misconduct would have a negative impact on
international inter-state relations and would be prejudicial to
society as a
  whole.
5. The NDC is of the view that a key responsibility of spokespersons of
  structures and organs of the ANC is to disseminate and articulate
decisions of the movement with clarity, consistent with policies of
the
   ANC.
6. Certainty is important because investors form their opinion about
South
  Africa from the statements issued by spokespersons. The respondent¹s
  reckless conduct not only attracted liability to himself but also put
the
  country at risk.
7. The NDC is mindful of the fact that the ANC Youth League is robust in
its
  manner of conducting its affairs and has developed a tendency of
pushing the boundaries of policy formulation, as the respondent has
testified, and the ANC would not expect its youth wing to act any
differently. However, the NDC is of the view that a distinction must
be
  made between robust expression on the one hand and recklessness and   ill-discipline in expression on the other. It was incumbent upon the
  respondent, as a senior leader of the Youth League, to be mindful of
this
  distinction at all times.
8. The NDC is also of the view that the respondent should have realised
  that states guard their sovereignty jealously and that the ANC had
given
  an undertaking in the Freedom Charter, more than sixty years ago, to
respect this convention.
9. Any message from the Youth League as a structure within the ANC, could
  be perceived by the public at large to be a message representing the
views
  of the ANC and, by implication, the government of South Africa.
10. The NDC has noted the arrogance of the respondent and his response to
    the ANC that ³the Youth League¹s position on Botswana will stand
until
    resolved with the ANC² and regards such conduct as an act of
defiance
    and ill-discipline. This arrogance and defiance, the NDC notes, is
a far
    cry from the manner in which different leaders of the Youth League,
over
    the decades, conducted their affairs in attempting to influence ANC
policy and to contribute to the political and organisational work
of the
    ANC and the life of the nation.
11. Once the ANC, through its Headquarters, has pronounced on any
    matter, no structure or member may publicly contradict such
pronouncement.
12. In the circumstances the NDC considers the two offences for which the
    respondent has been found guilty to be very serious in nature.  
Sanction
1. Having considered all the above factors, the NDC imposed the following
  sanction in respect of the two acts of misconduct of which the
respondent has been found guilty:
1.1 The respondent¹s membership is suspended for a period of 3
(three)
        years.  
    1.2 Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the Constitution of the
       ANC Youth League, this ruling is applicable to the respondent¹s
membership of the ANC Youth League.
  1.3 The respondent shall vacate his position as a member of National
        Executive Committee of the ANC Youth League.
  The respondent has the right to appeal to the NDCA within 14 days.
Dated at Johannesburg this 10th day of November 2011
FOURTH HEARING  THE MATTER INVOLVING CDE MALEMA
Three charges were leveled against cde Malema:
€    The first charge is for contravening Rule 25.5(i) of the
Constitution of the African National Congress by behaving in such a way
as to provoke serious divisions or a breakdown of unity in the
organization.
€    The second charge is for contravening Rule 25.5(c) of the
Constitution of the African National Congress by behaving in such a way
as to bring the organization into disrepute.
€    The third charge is for contravening Rule 25.5 (d) of the
Constitution of the African National Congress by sowing racism or
political intolerance.
Prelude to Findings
As a prelude to the finding on the specific Charges, the NDC finds that
there is a difference between the Youth League as an institution and the
respondent as an individual. In the same way there is a distinction
between the Youth League statement and the respondent¹s utterances. The
NEC of the Youth League was not charged for its statement. It was the
respondent who is being charged for his utterances.
Charge One
The first charge is for contravening Rule 25.5(i) of the Constitution of
the African National Congress by behaving in such a way as to provoke
serious divisions or a breakdown of unity in the organization,
IN THAT:
When addressing a press conference at the conclusion of the ANC Youth
League NEC meeting on 31 July 2011, he actively participated in making
the following statement:
³In the past, we know that President Mbeki used to represent that agenda very well² and further that
³The African agenda is generally no longer a priority, and we think that
there is a temptation by the colonizer and the imperialist to want to
re-colonise Africa in a different but sophisticated way  and President
Mbeki stood directly opposed to that type of conduct.²
Finding on Charge 1
The NDC finds that:-
1. The onus was on the respondent to explain the utterances which he
  admitted. Save for a bald denial that he was having a Œdig¹ at
President
  Zuma, the respondent has failed to discharge this onus and provide
any
  reasonable explanation for his utterances.
2. Given that the respondent was elaborating on the Youth League
  statement, as he contended, then the inescapable conclusion is that
the
  respondent accepted and associated himself with the Youth League
statement which attributed the existence of a vacuum and the decline
in
  the African agenda directly to the departure of President Mbeki. It
is this  
  statement that the respondent was elaborating on.
3. The respondent¹s evidence that the Youth League (and not him)
  suspected that the ANC and the South African government had
relegated the African agenda, when considered against the            
  objective fact that President Mbeki had resigned three years ago in
June  
  2008, is further support for the inference that the respondent was  
in fact negatively comparing different administrations and leaders of
the
  ANC and ANC-led government.
4. The fact that comrade Motlanthe and President Zuma are not
  mentioned by name in the respondent¹s utterances is immaterial
and does not detract from the conclusion that the respondent was
comparing different administrations. In the context of the
respondent¹s
  utterances, reference to President Zuma is apparent by innuendo and
supports the inference above.
5. Comparison between different eras of leadership in the ANC¹s history
by
  itself is not an act of misconduct and in fact is part of our culture
of   democratic debate. However, the suggestion that the administrations
after
  comrade Mbeki have relegated or abandoned the African agenda and
thereby aided and abetted the imperialist agenda that seeks to
recolonise Africa is untrue and portrays the current ANC government
and
  its leadership under President Zuma in a negative light and therefore
has
  the potential to sow division and disunity.
6. On the respondent¹s own evidence about the performance of the
  ANC, South African government, SADC and the AU, the inference above
excludes every other reasonable inference that could have been drawn
from the respondent¹s utterances.
7. The inference drawn above is consistent with all the proved facts.
8. The respondent was personally liable for his utterances and the NDC
  rejects the defence of the respondent that he was acting in a
representative capacity or on behalf on the collective on the
following
  grounds:-
  8.1 It would normally be the responsibility of the respondent, as he
        testified, to read the Youth  League statement in his capacity
as
        President of the Youth League. However, on this particular
occasion he was advised by the NEC of the Youth League not to
read the press statement because the spotlight was on him and
he
        could be questioned on issues relating to his family trust. For
that
        reason the SG was mandated to read the Youth League press
statement.
  8.2 Even if the respondent did elect to attend the press conference,
he
        was under no obligation to answer any questions. He attracted
personal liability when he voluntarily chose to answer
questions at
        the press conference to elaborate on the Youth League
statement,
        which was not within the parametres of ANC policy.
  8.3 By agreeing to be bound by the decision of the collective, the
        respondent by conduct, associated himself with the decision of
the
        collective.
  8.4 If that decision is subsequently found to be unlawful (i.e. it         constitutes a contravention of ANC policy or the ANC¹s Code of
Conduct) or unreasonable (i.e. it could expose the member of
the
        collective to liability for misconduct for articulating the
decision of
        the collective) then the respondent, by doing something or
saying
        something in furtherance of the collective decision, attracts
personal liability.
9. Having regard to the evidence of comrade Mantashe and the
  respondent¹s own evidence, the respondent¹s behaviour was directed at
the leadership of the ANC and as such could potentially
  provoke serious divisions or lead to a breakdown of unity in the ANC.
10. The complainant has proved, on a balance of probabilities that the
    respondent¹s behaviour constituted an act of misconduct as
contemplated in Rule 25.5(i) of the ANC Constitution.
11. The causal link between the respondent¹s behavior and the misconduct
    contemplated in Rule 25.5 (i) of the ANC Constitution has been
established, by implication and on a balance of probabilities.
12. The respondent is found guilty as charged.  
Charge Two
The second charge is for contravening Rule 25.5(c) of the Constitution of
the African National Congress by behaving in such a way as to bring the
organization into disrepute:
IN THAT
1. On 31 July 2011 he addressed a press conference where, in the name of
  the National Executive Committee of the ANC Youth League, a structure
which operates within the policy confines of the ANC, by making the
following pronouncements:
³Botswana¹s leadership of government poses a serious threat to
Africa,
      so we need a progressive government in Botswana²; further
  ³We are not going to sit with neighbours that conduct themselves like
       that. Botswana is in full co-operation with imperialistsŠ and
the
       government is undermining the African agenda²; and further
  ³The ANCYL would establish a ³Botswana Command Team² which will
        work towards uniting all opposition forces in Botswana to
oppose the         puppet regime of Botswana led by the Botswana Democratic Party.²
These careless, negligent or reckless pronouncements and utterances
  were a deviation of established and ongoing ANC policy and had the
effect
  of embarrassing and bringing the organization into disrepute within
and
  beyond the borders of South Africa.
Finding on Charge 2
The NDC finds that:-
1. The respondent as a member of the NEC of the ANC should or ought to
  have known that the Youth League statement on Botswana was not part
of or within the parameters of ANC policy.
2. The respondent did not provide any additional explanation beyond
  stating that he uttered the words alleged in the Charge to support
the
  Youth League¹s decision to establish a Botswana Command Team.
3. The respondent¹s utterances per se against a sovereign state were
  reckless and baseless pronouncements and impacted negatively on
South Africa¹s relations with Botswana, the SADC and the AU, brought
the ANC, as a liberation movement and the ruling party in South
Africa,
  into disrepute and were in conflict with ANC policies and the ANC¹s
resolution on Party-to-Party relations as adopted at the 52nd
National
  Conference in Polokwane.
4. The respondent¹s utterances on the audiovisual clip (that was produced
in
  evidence) that a team was to be sent to Botswana or a team from
Botswana would visit South Africa by the end of August went beyond
the
  Youth League statement. It is indicative of a final decision that was
in the
  process of being implemented and was his personal view.
5. In the absence of providing a satisfactory explanation, the only
deduction
  the NDC could make, either directly or through witnesses, was that
the
  respondent was expressing a personal view.
6. By his conduct the respondent associated himself with the contents of
the
  Youth League statement.7. By voluntarily choosing to amplify the Youth League statement, which
  was not part of or within the parameters of ANC policy and where
there
  was no obligation upon him to do so, the respondent acted recklessly
and
  in contravention of ANC policy and the ANC¹s Code of Conduct.
8. Even if it is to be assumed that the respondent acted in a
representative
  capacity, then his utterances (which expressed a personal view) would
make him personally liable.
9. The respondent¹s personal liability is founded on two acts of
misconduct  
  contemplated in Rule 25.5 (c) of the ANC Constitution, both of which
are
  a deviation of ongoing ANC policy and which had the effect of
bringing the
  organisation into disrepute:-
  9.1 his act of publicly uttering excerpts from the contents of the
        Youth League statement which was not part of and within the
parameters of ANC policy;
  9.2 his utterances, which do not appear in and go beyond the Youth
        League statement, expressed a personal view and was in conflict
with
        ANC policy.
10. Having regard to the evidence of comrades Mbete and Mantashe, the  
    audiovisual clip and the respondent¹s own evidence, the complainant
has proved:-
    10.1 that the respondent¹s utterances were reckless and a deviation
of
            ongoing ANC policy;
     10.2 that the respondent brought the ANC into disrepute; and
    10.3 that the respondent¹s behaviour constituted misconduct as
             provided for in the ANC Constitution.
11. The complainant has proved its case on a balance of probabilities and
    the causal link between the misconduct of the respondent and the
contravention set out in Rule 25.5 ( c ) of the ANC Constitution
has
    been established.
12. The respondent is found guilty as charged.Charge Three
The third charge is for contravening Rule 25.5 (d) of the Constitution of
the African National Congress by sowing racism or political intolerance:
This charge relates to statements made by the respondent at a public
rally on 9 May 2011 in Galeshewe.
There was an alternative charge of contravening Rule 25.5 (c ) of the
Constitution of the African National Congress, by behaving in such a way
as to bring the organization into disrepute.
Finding on Charge 3
The NDC finds that:-
1. After evaluating all the evidence, the complainant has not proved its
case
  on a balance of probabilities.
2. The respondent is found not guilty on this Charge.
3. The evidence of the complainant does not support the alternative
charge
  of bringing the ANC into disrepute as contemplated in Rule 25.5 (c)
of the
  ANC Constitution and the respondent is accordingly found not guilty
on
  the alternative Charge.
Sanction
1. Factors taken into account for the purpose of sanctioning
€    The seriousness of the charge;
€  the presence of aggravating factors;
€  any previous findings against the respondent;
€  the presence of mitigating factors;
€  the concept that the sanction must take into consideration the
interests of the organisation, the respondent and society at large;
€    the concept of a graduated approach to sanctioning; and
€    the sanction must fit the offence.
2. Consideration of an appropriate sanction1. As the President of the Youth League, the respondent had a duty to
lead
  and direct the Youth League and to focus on the League¹s
constitutional
  mandate in terms of Rule 7.4 of the ANC Constitution viz. to confront
and
  champion the issues facing the youth and to ensure that the youth
make
  a full contribution to the work of the ANC and to the life of the
nation.
2. This places an obligation on the leadership of the Youth League to
  prepare its membership for active participation in the motherbody and
to
understand and defend the constitution of the ANC, its values and its
policies.
3.  Outside the core constitutional mandate of the Youth League, it was
and
  still is open to and expected of the ANC Youth League to push the
boundaries of policy formulation within the ANC on any policy issue,
as it
  has done historically, in order to make a full contribution to the
work of
  the ANC and the life of the nation, provided that such lobbying is
done
  within ANC policy and procedure.
4. The fundamental goal of the ANC remains the creation of a united, non-
  racial, non-sexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa. Non-
  racialism was and still remains the driving force for the formation
and
  existence of the ANC. In the furtherance of this objective, the
respondent
  had an obligation to shy away from sowing division and disunity in
the  
  ANC.
5. In the view of the NDC, the respondent, as the leader of the Youth
  League, should have focused his energy on developing programmes to
actively reach out to the broad cross-section of the youth, both
Black and
  White, so that the Youth League of today would be at the forefront in
cementing the foundation of tomorrow¹s non-racial and non-sexist.
  society.
6. The NDC is also of the view that the respondent should have realised
  that states guard their sovereignty jealously and that the ANC had
given
  an undertaking in the Freedom Charter, more than sixty years ago, to   respect this convention and to respect the right to peace and
friendship
  and self-determination of all nations.
7. As the ANC is the ruling party in government, the NDC has no doubt
that
  the respondent¹s misconduct would have a negative impact on
international and inter-state relations and would be prejudicial to
South
  African society as a whole.
8. The acts of misconduct for which the respondent has been found guilty
  are very serious and have damaged the integrity the ANC and
South Africa¹s international reputation.
9. In May 2010 the respondent was found guilty of contravening Rule 25.5
  (i) of the ANC Constitution and the sanction imposed, inter alia,
was
  that should the respondent be found guilty of contravening Rule
25.5(i)
  of the ANC Constitution within the next two years, his membership
of the ANC shall be summarily suspended for a period to be
determined by the ANC.
10. The ANC Youth League is the preparatory school for future activists
and    
    leaders of the ANC. Discipline is a core attribute of any
leadership and  
    the ANC would have expected the respondent to have had led by    
    example. In the  space of a year and a half, the respondent has
been
    found guilty of 4 (four) acts of sowing division in the ANC,
bringing the    
    ANC into disrepute and defying the National Officials.
11. The NDC is of the view that, at its most fundamental level, the ANC
is a
    voluntary organisation which people join willingly because they
subscribe to its aims, objectives, culture, ideals and value
system.
    This is the glue that has held the ANC together for almost a
hundred
    years. No one is forced to join the ANC or compelled to remain in
the
    ANC if he or she is not happy. In the same spirit, the ANC should
not be
    obliged to retain the active membership of any person, without
exception, who pays scant regard to the membership oath of the ANC,
its policies, organisational culture, value system and Code of
Conduct.SANCTION
12. Having considered all these factors, the sanction on cde Malema
imposed is as follows:  
    12.1 With regard to the respondent¹s disciplinary hearing in May
2010,
            the respondent¹s membership is suspended for a period of 2
(two)
            years;
    12.2 In respect of the present disciplinary hearing:-
           12.2.1 The respondent¹s membership is suspended for a period
of
                      5 (five) years;
           12.2.2 The sanctions imposed in 12.1 and 12.2.1 shall run
                      concurrently.
           12.2.3 Pursuant to Article 11.2 of Schedule A of the
Constitution of
                      the ANC Youth League, this ruling is applicable
to the
                      respondent¹s membership of the ANC Youth League;
and
           12.2.4 The respondent shall vacate his position as President
of the
                      ANC Youth League.
    The respondent has the right to appeal to the NDCA within 14 days.
Dated at Johannesburg this 10h day of November 2011
Issued by:
African National Congress
54 Sauer Street
Johannesburg
2001
__________
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...