The African Transformation Movement (ATM) president Vuyolethu Zungula said his party won’t be boycotting Parliament.
This comes after the party launched an application with Electoral Court seeking it to declare that the elections were not free and fair, to set them aside and order that the elections be re-run in 90 days’ time.
Zungula said the ATM will continue its participation in Parliament until such time a competent court of law sets the elections aside.
“We will participate in Parliament while contesting the elections in court. Both actions can happen simultaneously, they are not mutually exclusive.
“Otherwise, we would be giving the new centre right-wing government free rein in Parliament and providing no oversight,” he said.
On the question of why he contested the deputy speaker position knowing that they were contesting the legitimacy of the elections, Zungula told The Star his participation didn’t mean the ATM should ignore the electoral misconduct and irregularities.
“We need to get to the bottom of it and we hope the courts give the matter due consideration. The ATM filed papers before the sitting of Parliament, not after. This issue (court case) would not have been affected by anything that might or might not have happened in Parliament regarding my candidacy for deputy speaker.”
The ATM leader said they have seen hundreds of irregularities throughout the country, which were brought to the party’s attention by their party agents and South Africans at large.
“I don’t want to talk too much about this because the matter is now before the court. However, we believe the evidence we have is material and substantial,” he said.
The ATM follows the uMkhonto weSizwe Party as the second party to petition the Electoral Court in declaring the May 29 elections invalid.
The MK Party is seeking to have the elections re-run within 90 days of a court order.
Last week, the party made a similar application to the Constitutional Court to block Parliament from convening its first sitting.
It claims “hundreds of thousands of votes” were stolen from it during the national elections, but it told the Constitutional Court it would not provide evidence yet.
The apex court dismissed the application and stated that it was neither within its jurisdiction to hear the case nor in the interests of justice to grant direct access.
The Star