Constitutional amendment bill unconstitutional � Molokomme
Sharon Mathala | Friday May 29, 2015 14:25
l Moyo tells Attorney General off
After the October 24 general elections, the AG approached the courts to declare unconstitutional the parliamentary standing orders on the endorsement of the Vice President, the election of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker.
The case has mockingly been dubbed ‘hands-up!’ or ‘lehenza!’ as it came soon after what many saw as President Ian Khama’s failure to force Parliament to vote for Speaker by show of hands. At the time Khama was reported to be rooting for Gladys Kokorwe, who has since been elected Speaker, over then incumbent Margaret Nasha.
Responding to questions from the PAC members, Molokomme explained that she had received a letter from ‘parties’ that did not agree with the interpretation of the standing orders.
“The motivation by my office to take the matter to court was because I had an apprehension that there would be chaos. As the principal advisor to the government I took the decision to take the matter to the court because I could foresee chaos at the first sitting of Parliament,” she said. She insisted the taxpayer’s money was wasted during the case, which sparked international attention.
“I do not believe that colossal tax payer money was spent,” she said in response to a concern raised by Selebi-Phikwe West MP, Dithapelo Keorapetse. Keorapetse had expressed concern at the AG’s decision to bring to court something that her office had endorsed over the years.
“Why did you find it critical at the time to challenge the standing orders? I find it difficult that they where operational for a number of years under your watch,” he said.
Molokomme’s decision to take the matter to court delayed Parliament for two weeks. Eventually the courts dismissed the AG’s application. Contrary to her fears of a chaotic Parliament, MPs went on to vote by way of secret ballot, and endorsed without any disorder the new Speaker, deputy Speaker and the Vice President.
On the issue of the pending Constitutional amendment bill, Molokomme explained that she felt the provision of the bill was unconstitutional and had informed the President about her position. She also advised Parliament against it but it went ahead and passed the bill into law.
“I also gave the same advice to the President and he is still considering it, I am of the view that it unconstitutional,” she said.
Guma Vs Molokomme
Tati East MP, Moyo Guma, shot down Molokomme who had firmly told PAC not to focus on other issues except those she had presented. In an intense exchange Moyo told Molokomme off, citing that as the PAC member he has the right to ask the AG any question he believes is crucial.
“I cannot examine the books of account if I do not know how the organisation operates. We are perfectly within our rights to ask some of the questions,” Guma said. The MP further stated that, “in accounts, which is my field, I cannot examine books without understanding the environment of which that organisation operates, examination of books of accounts in not in isolation.
“I cannot make a conclusion on a matter that I do not understand, it is allowed, we will ask questions which you many feel uncomfortable about but unfortunately we have to do so, and we will continue to do so”.
Molokomme had said that she did not want to answer certain questions, referencing specific cases. “I am a little concerned at the fact that I spent a lot of time having to answer a question not on the report I made but on my mandate and on specific cases that I took to court,” she said.