Cape Town - UCT professor Richard Calland’s professor Richard Calland’s impartiality has come under scrutiny after Parliament announced him as part of a legal triumvirate to head the Section 89 independent panel to consider a motion into the removal of President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo announced Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula’s decision after consideration of 17 nominees submitted by political parties for appointments to the panel to conduct a preliminary assessment of a motion tabled by the African Transformation Movement.
Calland, former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, who will chair the panel, and Judge Thokozile Masipa, formerly a judge in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, form the panel.
The motion refers to Section 89 of the Constitution, which deals with the removal of a president on the grounds of serious violation of the Constitution, serious misconduct and inability to perform the functions of office.
It comes on the back of investigations into the aftermath of a burglary at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm.
Rules adopted by Parliament for this process state that the panel comprise “three fit and proper, competent, experienced and respected” people who may be a judge or someone with the necessary legal skills.
But social media abounded in political pundits’ criticism of Calland’s appointment after public remarks, which they said favoured Ramaphosa.
DA leader John Steenhuisen retweeted posts by Calland, one in 2020 in which the professor compared Ramaphosa to “FD Roosevelt, reassuring with a plan, offering hope... squashing those who try to obstruct it”.
Steenhuisen wrote: “So the chaotic National Assembly Speaker has announced the so-called ‘independent panel’ to lead the section 89 committee. Included in this is political commentator Richard Calland. By no stretch of the imagination can he be regarded as independent.”
DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube said Calland’s political commentary and social media pronouncements “displayed a consistent bias towards the president which makes him unsuitable for this role given that this panel must be free from any hint of bias”.
The EFF also rejected the panel, calling Calland an “unrepentant advocate and admirer” of Ramaphosa.
Recommended by the GOOD Party, Calland is a qualified lawyer.
Approached by the Cape Argus, Calland said: “It’s not appropriate for me to comment. I hope you understand.”
He referred queries to Good secretary-general Brett Herron, who said: “I don’t think he’s conflicted.
“Those who accuse him of entering a legal process with bias are making a scandalous allegation. Legal professionals are trained to assess evidence and facts and to do so impartially.
“To assume that because he has written political commentary means he’s biased, exposes a failure to understand how a legal professional is trained. It’s an intellectual failure of anyone who is criticising his appointment.”