The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

I will today write to the Speaker of Parliament, Max Sisulu, to request that an urgent question be tabled to President Zuma, about his failure to comply with the Executive Members Ethics Act, ahead of President's Question Time, next week Thursday.

A copy of the letter is available on request.

The Question I will propose is as follows:

1. (a) What are the full circumstances regarding your failure to comply with the requirements of Section 5 of the Executive Ethics Code; in particular, your failure to register your interests within 60 days of taking office, as required by the Code (b) How do you reconcile this failure with the requirements of the oath you undertook on being sworn into office, to "obey, observe, uphold and maintain the Constitution and all other law of the Republic" and (c) Whether you will make an apology to Parliament and the country; if not, why not?

The rules of Parliament allow for an "urgent question" to be tabled "to any member of Cabinet, including the President and the Deputy President". The rules and procedures for the National Assembly state that such a question should be handed in to the Speaker and the Speaker must then consult with the Leader of Government Business before approving it.

Normally questions to the President need to be tabled two weeks before he appears, but this mechanism exists to allow for that process to be circumvented in the case of an urgent matter. The rules suggest that such a question be tabled "on the Tuesday in the week before the week in which it is to be answered", which would mean, technically, my request would be too late. However, it has not been tested and, the DA believes, if its purpose in principle is to allow an issue of urgent and considerable importance to be put to a member of the executive, then that principle should be what determines the Speaker's decision.

Certainly this is an issue of critical and national importance. A President's failure to comply with the law is deeply and profoundly significant. And in this particular case and context, in which President Zuma has in the past failed to fully and openly declare his interests to Parliament, it is all the more pertinent.

President Zuma also needs to make public his view on wealth audits in the light of his recent non-compliance - given that he himself has failed to adhere to the very regulatory mechanisms that he mooted as being suitable checks on public representatives' financial interests.

It is the DA's firm belief that the President must now account for his actions, both to Parliament, and in turn, to the South African public, to whom he owes a full and detailed explanation. We believe President's Question Time offers him such an opportunity. It is our hope that the Speaker will appreciate the need for the President to account and the importance of the DA's request.

The DA is also pursuing this matter through other avenues; most importantly, I have lodged a complaint with the Public Protector. We have today received a response from Adv Madonsela, the full text of which is as follows:

Dear Hon Trollip

RE: REQUEST TO INVESTIGATE PRESIDENT JACOB ZUMA'S APPARENT BREACH OF SECTION 5 OF THE EXECUTIVE ETHICS CODE

Your letter dated 8th March 2010 requesting my office to investigate the above matter in terms of the Executive Member's Ethics Act is hereby acknowledged.

Please be assured that the investigation will be carried out immediately and in compliance with the time line stipulated by the Executive Members Ethics Act.

I will also examine the law to establish if deviation then from the requirement that the report be submitted to the President will be appropriate in the circumstances.

I will revert to you as soon as I have progress to report.

Best wishes

Adv T N Madonsela