/ 1 January 2002

UDM to ask court to rule on floor-crossing

The United Democratic Movement will on Wednesday attempt to persuade the Constitutional Court that its application against the defection legislation should be heard as a matter of urgency.

South Africa’s political scene was thrown into confusion last month when the Cape High Court granted the UDM an interdict against the legislation on June 20. Judge Hennie Nel said he could not rule on the matter alone, and referred the case to a full bench.

Several MPs poised to cross the floor to other parties were caught off guard by the ruling, especially in the two provinces governed by coalitions — the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. There has been acrimony in both provinces.

Last Monday a full bench of the Cape High Court ruled that the matter was a constitutional one and passed it on to the Constitutional Court. Lawyers representing the UDM, the Inkatha Freedom Party, the Pan Africanist Congress, and the African Christian Democratic Party will argue Wednesday’s application together.

The Freedom Front has offered moral support. The past 10 days have seen bitter argument between parties, particularly the Democratic Alliance and the New National Party and ANC in the Western Cape, and the ANC and the IFP in KwaZulu-Natal.

The DA has accused several NNP MPs of wanting to transfer their membership to the ANC for self-serving reasons, while the NNP and its Western Cape alliance partner, the ANC, have accused the DA of petulance.

On Wednesday the UDM will attempt to persuade the court that the matter is so urgent that it should be heard without reasonable opportunity being given to other parties to adequately prepare argument on the matter, and without the court having time to ”give careful and adequate” consideration to all the issues before ruling.

The court also wants to hear argument on whether it can issue an interim interdict ”stabilising the situation that exists and ensuring that no person or legislature is prejudiced by the uncertainty that exists, or (is prejudiced) by the orders made by the high courts”. – Sapa