Abathembu Petition Report

NCOP Petitions and Executive Undertakings

05 February 2020
Chairperson: Ms Z Ncitha (ANC, Eastern Cape)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Select Committee met for the consideration and adoption of Abathembu Petition Report (Petition requesting the intervention of the NCOP, in relation to the alleged persecution and ostracisation of the Abathembu nation), and consideration and adoption of outstanding minutes.

The Committee did not adopt the report but agreed to wait for the process of the Ad Hoc Committee in the National Assembly (NA) to unfold, which is currently dealing with land issue in terms Section 25 of the Constitution.

The Committee adopted the Minutes of 21 November 2019.


Meeting report

Opening Remarks
The Chairperson welcomed all present in the meeting. She said that the previous year had ended in a good working relationship and hoped in the current term they would continue working together; when there was something that was not clear her door would always be open to any Member of the Committee. They should avoid unnecessary tensions and not hold in anything that would make them irritated. They wanted their term as a Committee to be smooth sailing.

The Chairperson read apologies of the following Committee Members:

Mr A Gxoyiya (ANC, Northern Cape)
Mr K Motsamai (EFF, Gauteng)
Mr E Mthethwa (ANC, KZN)
Mr S Zandamela (EFF, Mpumalanga)

The Committee accepted the apologies.

The Chairperson said there were two items on the agenda:

-Consideration and adoption of Abathembu Petition Report (Petition requesting the intervention of the NCOP, in relation to the alleged persecution and ostracisation of Abathembu nation)

-Consideration and adoption of outstanding Minutes.

The Committee also accepted the agenda for the meeting.

The Chairperson invited Members of the Committee to make some comments and questions of clarity with regard to the Abathembu Petition Report so that they could clarify those that were not part of the last meeting. Subsequently she propose a way forward on the petition itself.

Ms S Shaikh (ANC, Limpopo} felt that this was quite a complicated petition and that there were many legislative issues around land in this petition which they should explore because of the fact that there was a current process in Parliament around Section 25 of the Constitution in terms of the land. They should explore whether they needed to wait for that process to unfold or should allow this petition to run through that process, and thereafter have a look at it again.

Ms C Visser (DA, North West) agreed with Ms Shaikh that they could not deal with this petition at that time; they needed to wait until they had obtained clarity about Section 25 so that they could give a sound judgment after that process has been finalized.

Mr M Sileku (ANC, Western Cape) said his concern was about observation 7.5, which need to be clarified with regard to a certain Mr Majola who claimed to be a chief but was not recognised by the legitimate structure of a clan and still wanted to address the Committee. In future they should not allow people who were not recognised by legitimate structure of a particular clan to come and address them.

Mr T Dodovu (ANC, North West) said he had not been part of the meeting, but he had gone through the report about what was discussed and its observations. That was quite an important matter before this Committee especially when it dealt with the issue of land as they understand the history and the context of land in South Africa, and they needed to deal with it diligently. He agreed with Ms Shaikh in terms of what needed to happen in respect of this particular matter because there was an Ad Hoc Committee currently examining Section 25 of the Constitution.

Mr Dodovu suggested that as part of their recommendation they should say that the matter should be referred to that Ad Hoc Committee to be dealt at that level so that they avoid parallel processes would be avoided. What was good and important was for this Committee to give audience to the petitioner so as to listen on what the petitioner had to say. It was also good that they invite different stakeholders to come and give their own perspective and views about this matter.

The Chairperson thanked Members for their input. In clarifying the issue of Mr Majola the Chairperson said that luckily for them as a Committee when they had picked this matter up they had decided to have their first meeting at the O R Tambo Municipality where the Royal House of Abathembu was located so that they could link the petitioner with the Kingdom of the Abathembu. However, it was very clear that Mr Majola was working as an individual with certain groups, and is not within the monarchy of the Abathembu. That matter had consequently been isolated it as an issue for the Abathembu to resolve so that as this Committee did not become involved in matters that were outside their mandate as a Committee. As a result, they had requested the Abathembu to deal with this matter and if there was something they need to report to the Committee.

In addition, the recommendation as a Committee the Chairperson was proposing was that they should respond to Mr Majola to say that they had looked at the matter and had identified the fact that it concerned the reclaiming of the land. There was a process currently in place in the National Assembly in terms of Section 25 of the constitution, and therefore they (Majola) needed to wait for that process to be concluded. As this Committee they had to use resolve in terms of responding to Mr Majola because there was still a process in the National Assembly, which dealt with the issue of land in terms of Section 25.

The Chairperson said she is worried about taking this matter to the NA as suggested by Mr Dodovu because the National Assembly no longer has a petitions committee - it was disbanded that power was given to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) to deal with it. The (Committee) had to wait for the National Assembly process to be concluded so that they could respond accurately in terms of the outcome itself.

Ms Shaikh agreed with the way the Chairperson had summarised the matter and concurred with the discussion in this meeting. On the issue of Mr Majola, if he was not happy with that response there were other avenues he could take which he was free to do.

Mr Michael Mkwali, Researcher: NCOP, said that during their last meeting Mr Majola had also registered a complaint about the Premier who had refused to answer or respond to their grievances with regard to employment in the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) -that had not been mentioned in that report so that the Committee could look into the matter regarding the Premier’s office.

The Chairperson said all these issues would form part of the recommendations of the Committee when it finalised this matter.

The Chairperson said that the Committee had agreed to wait for the process of the Ad Hoc Committee in the National Assembly to unfold, which was currently dealing with land issue in terms Section 25 of the Constitution. They would subsequently deal with the report and then respond to Mr Majola in line with all the issues he had raised in the petition so that if he wanted to take the matter further than this Committee he was free to do so.

Minutes of 21 November 2019
Ms M Mmola (ANC, Mpumalanga) moved for the adoption of the minutes.

Mr  Dodovu seconded the move.

The Committee adopted the minutes with no corrections.

The Chairperson thanked Members for their inputs and availability.

The meeting adjourned.


Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: