MK Party MPs boycott first parliament sitting

For the MK Party to succeed in court, they must present compelling reasons to justify the urgency of their request.

Expert Opinions on MK’s Legal Position

Constitutional law expert Advocate Lufuno Nevondwe questioned the timing of the MK Party’s actions. He pointed out that the election results were announced on June 2nd, yet the MK Party had not filed an urgent application to halt the first parliamentary session.

“The MK case lacks urgency since no immediate application has been filed following the results announcement. Any claim of urgency appears self-created, which is unlikely to meet the court’s stringent requirements,” remarked Nevondwe.

ALSO READ: ‘ANC Will Never Be The Ruling Party Again’: Zimbabwean Prophet Mellontik Orasi’s Remarks on ANC Future Sparks a Buzz

Political Analysis of MK’s Strategy

Professor Dirk Kotze, a political analyst from the University of South Africa, suggested that the MK Party’s actions are part of a larger strategy to portray their members as victims after failing to secure a two-thirds majority as promised.

“This maneuver by MK is an attempt to depict themselves as victims, having failed to achieve their electoral promises,” commented Kotze.

Kotze also noted that despite boycotting the first sitting, MK members could still take their parliamentary oaths at a later date, provided a judge oversees the ceremony.

ALSO READ: WATCH: South Africa’s ANC Seeks To Form Government Of National Unity

First Sitting Agenda

During the first sitting, members will elect the President, Speaker, and Deputy Speaker. This requires a majority vote, equating to 50 per cent plus one of those present.