Image: ANTONIO MUCHAVE
What is clear from the outcome of our elections recently, where no party was the outright winner, is that we are in uncharted waters.
Political players are all grappling with our new-found reality. By and large, they profess to want the best for the country.
For the past few days our nation has been captured by a debate about which option is best to formulate a government.
The ANC has proposed a government of national unity as its preferred route.
Whatever the ultimate decision, it must be a product of maturing politics and cooperation for the good of our country.
Equally important, we must place on elected representatives the responsibility to guard against violations of the constitution, even those that may not appear as such.
On Friday, a number of political parties wrote to chief justice Raymond Zondo asking him to convene a meeting between all leaders of political parties represented in parliament “to engage in a constructive dialogue and deliberation on the proposed government of national unity and the agenda of government for the next five years”.
The parties – the UDM, ACDP, ATM, Bosa, PAC and UAT (United Africans Transformation) – believe that the evolving landscape of governance requires that a framework of inclusive decision-making be established.
They further state that as the custodian of the constitution, Zondo is best placed to oversee such a meeting.
This is misguided and should be rejected by Zondo and the public at large.
Our constitution is clear on maintaining a separation of powers between the different arms of the state.
Furthermore, the judicial code of conduct is clear that judges should not pay heed to political parties, nor should they consult with the executive or a legislative body except when it concerns matters of law or the administration of justice.
The meeting requested by these political parties, while it may appear well meaning, does not fall under these exceptions.
Therefore, not only would Zondo's involvement in it violate the doctrine of separation but he would be in violation of the judicial code should he agree to facilitate the meeting.
It is reasonable to expect the political parties to negotiate in good faith, by themselves or guided by independent facilitators, without needing to be babysat by the judiciary to have constructive political conversations.