ATC211125: Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on the Complaint Against Honourable Faiez. Jacobs, MP

Ethics and Members' Interest

Report of the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests on the Complaint Against Honourable Faiez. Jacobs, Mp

The Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests (“the Committee”) having considered the complaint against Hon. Faiez. Jacobs, MP, reports its finding and its recommendation on penalty, in terms of item 10.7.8.1 of the Code of Ethical Conduct and Disclosure of Members’ Interests (“the Code”), as follows.

INTRODUCTION

The Office of the Registrar of Members’ Interests received a complaint from Hon. Alexandra Abrahams, MP (“the Complainant”) against Hon. Faiez Jacobs, MP (“the Member”) on 2 July 2021 for an alleged breach of the Code.  

 

SUMMARY OF THE COMPLAINT 

The Complainant alleges that she and the Member are participants on a WhatsApp group chat (“the group chat”) for the Bonteheuwel Community in the Western Cape. A Ward Councillor, Mr. Angus Mckenzie is also a participant on the group chat. He deposed to an affidavit in support of the complaint against the Member.

The allegation is that the Member posted approximately 26 messages on the group chat referring to Mr. McKenzie as a “housenigger”. The Complainant states that this conduct is unbecoming of a Member of Parliament.

 

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE BY THE MEMBER

The Member submitted a written response to the complaint wherein he indicates that the complaint is frivolous, vexatious and unfounded. He indicates that the group chat started as a platform for Covid-19 updates during March 2020 and then it grew to include people who were not resident in Bonteheuwel. The focus and tone of the group chat shifted.

The Member indicates that he and other members of the African National Congress (ANC) who are participants on the group chat were often insulted by Mr. Mckenzie. In response to one of the insults on 23 April 2020 he posted the following on the group chat: “if a house nigger was a person, it would be him”. The Member states that Mr. Mckenzie strongly identifies as a “Coloured” South African and he often refers to himself as the “drunk uncle in the family’. That during the period of April 2020 to 6 May 2020 Mr McKenzie never objected to the references made toward him.

The Member further states that the group chat dealt with matters of politics, and community related matters. He also states that the Complainant only filed the complaint for political gain and motif. Also, that Mr. McKenzie should have deposed to the main affidavit and not Hon. Abrahams, MP.

 

COMMITTEE DELIBERATIONS

The Committee considered the origin of the term “Housenigger”. The term was used during the slave era to refer to a black person as being subservient and accultured. It was also used to refer to a black slave domestic worker. The slave assumed the identity of the House Master for whom he worked. In this way the slave lost his identity and dignity. The Committee noted that slave people were people of colour, i.e. black. The usage of the term is derogatory and racist. 

The Committee noted that the Member did not deny that he referred to Mr. McKenzie as a “Housenigger” on the group chat. The Committee also considered it unbecoming of a Member of Parliament to place such comment on a community group chat. Further that the usage of the term cannot be justified as a means of retaliation to alleged insults hurled at political party members by Mr. McKenzie.

As the word “housenigger” is derogatory, the Committee found that the posting of the term on the group chat constitutes a breach of the Members’ duty to maintain public confidence and trust in the integrity of Parliament and thereby engender the respect and confidence that society needs to have in Parliament as a representative institution. It further constitutes a breach of the Members’ duty to eradicate all forms of discrimination.

 Item 4.1 of the Code provides as follows:

“4.1     Members must:

4.1.1   … 4.1.4

4.1.5   maintain public confidence and trust in the integrity of Parliament and thereby engender the respect and confidence that society needs to have in Parliament as a representative institution; and

4.1.6   in the performance of their duties and responsibilities, be committed to the eradication of all forms of discrimination.”

 

FINDING                                                  

The Committee found that the Member breached item 10.1.1.3 of the Code read with item 4.1 i.e. items 4.1.5 and 4.1.6.

 

SANCTION

The Member was afforded an opportunity to address written representations to the Committee on the sanction. A summary of the written representations is set out below.

The Member states that –

1. he does not deny using the term “housenigger”;
2. the Committee viewed the term in the wrong context;
3. he did not intend to defame Mr. McKenzie neither did he use the term as a racist term;
4. the Committee should have been aware that the term was used during the period of slavery in the United States of America to refer to slaves who worked in mansions of plantation owners;
5. the expression relates to a slavish mentality and not the fact that the person was black;
6. he has an exemplary record as a Member of Parliament;
7. he has never breached the Code and will do all to ensure that he does not breach the Code in future;
8. he apologised to Mr. McKenzie but Mr. McKenzie has failed to acknowledge his apology. By apologising, he has shown genuine remorse;
9. he accepts that the usage of the word may have given rise to offence even though it was not his intention to cause offence;
10. the penalty in terms of item 10.7.7.2 should not be applied as it is too severe and the matter does not warrant a serious or severe penalty.
11. he requires reasons why a penalty in terms of item 10.7.7.2 is being considered and not in terms of item 10.7.7.1;
12. he requests the Committee to consider a penalty in terms of item 10.7.7.1(i) of the Code which is a reprimand in the House.
13. he indicates that he reserves his right to have the matter taken on review.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ON SANCTION

The Committee noted that most of the factors raised in the written representation was already discussed at the time of the finding of breach.

The Committee is bound to consider a sanction in terms of item 10.7.7.2 of the Code as that provision instructs that, where there is a finding of breach in terms of item 10.1.1.3, the Committee cannot impose the penalties mentioned in item 10.7.7.1 of the Code.

The Committee therefore, in terms of item 10.7.7.2 of the Code recommends to the House to impose a penalty as follows:

“That the Member enter a public apology in the House for using the derogatory and discriminatory term “housenigger” to refer to Mr. McKenzie on a WhatsApp group chat that consisted of members of the community and members of various political parties. “

 

REPORT TO BE CONSIDERED

 

BEKIZWE NKOSI                         LYDIA MOSHODI

CO-CHAIRPERSONS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND MEMBERS’ INTERESTS