Malema only fighting ‘the good fight’ at PAP – political analyst

This week’s chaos at Pan African Parliament (PAP) has put the spotlight on the quality of African leaders and their contribution to building parliamentary democracy.

A confrontation such as what happened when Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema threatened “I’ll kill you” during a session earlier this week, was traditionally frown upon.

ALSO READ: ‘They stole it from us! Sneaky eNCA! Wicked, tricksy, false!’ – EFF furious

The continent was always known for consensus decision-making, as exemplified by the African Union (AU), PAP’s mother body. But despite the PAP members “fight” that forced an abrupt short adjournment on Monday and a postponement on Tuesday, an expert believed the “fight” was part of democracy and added to robust debating.

Political analyst Prof Siphamandla Zondi said PAP, based at Gallagher Estate, did a far better job than the “old boys club” AU to contribute to a dynamic parliamentary democracy.

He believed robust debate was necessary to discuss the leadership matter. Zondi criticised what he termed “too much consensus” in the decision-making by the AU.

It was misleading because the members agreed on everything at the expense of democratic debate, accommodating differing ideas. While PAP had no mandate to pass any laws, but discuss major issues on the continent, it played a significant role in African democracy.

It dealt with unity and regional integration and placed collective security on the agenda.

“One role is law-making and another the review of policies. The third is deliberation on priority issues. It has shared a number of resolutions with the AU and civil society, placing Africa at the centre globally,” Zondi said.

Another expert, Dirk Kotze, raised the spectre of Arabic solidarity that tended to determine choices or positions on issues. The fight broke out as the members disagreed on whether the presidency should be rotational or not.

Rotational presidency appeared to be logical considering that the West, East and Central African regions had their turns to serve. The South and the North argued it was their turn. But Zondi believed the fierce debate was good.

WATCH: Malema threatens to ‘kill’ MP in Pan African parliament

“There should be contestations. We forget that the debate about procedures is in the nature of parliamentary democracy because no rules are sacrosanct or unchallengeable.”

Zondi said the Francophone-Anglophone and Lusophone colonial legacy would always emerge when Africa debated issues.

“But we need to be careful because there are positions held by groups that may come from both sides that get regionalised. We tend to overplay these labels, but they do not explain as much as we think they do.”