MK Party denies infighting, reaffirms confidence in Chief Whip Makhubele
Image: File
The uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) has strongly denied allegations of internal infighting and confirmed that Colleen Makhubele remains firmly in her position as Chief Whip, despite purported suggestions of a petition calling for her removal.
At a press briefing held in Parliament on Thursday, MKP parliamentary leader Dr John Hlophe said reports suggesting a letter had been sent to party president Jacob Zuma to oust Makhubele were entirely false.
'There is no letter, there is no petition, in terms of which MPs are calling for the head of the Chief Whip. This is a figment of someone's imagination,' said Hlophe.
'Quite frankly, I would have been the first person to receive that petition. I asked President Zuma as late as last night. There is no such letter. Comrade Colleen Makhubele remains the Chief Whip. She is very good. She is very effective.'
The party said recent internal changes, including the removal of some individuals from its whippery, were strategic and administrative, not evidence of factionalism.
Hlophe explained that the MKP is reorienting itself towards legislative impact and preparing constitutional amendments, including a proposed revision of Section 235 of the Constitution, which relates to self-determination.
'We don't believe South Africa belongs to just anyone who lives here,' Hlophe said.
'You must be a citizen of this country before you can say, 'I am a South African.' You can't visit here for two weeks and say, 'I love Constantia, I live here now, I must benefit'. We are bringing serious amendments to the Constitution, and that means realignment of internal parliamentary functions.'
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
On the matter of a deputy whip, Nhlamulo Ndhlela, who contested his removal, Hlophe confirmed that a termination letter had been sent and received.
'Initially, he said he hadn't received the letter. When it became clear that he had, he changed the story and said the signature on the letter was forged. I can confirm that the letter came from my office.'
Chief Whip Colleen Makhubele said the rumours had caused unnecessary disruption and she expressed disappointment at how the matter played out publicly.
'As a new Chief Whip, it's only been a month, it's been a very stormy time,' said Makhubele.
'I must say it has also been productive, and I appreciate the full cooperation of all MKP caucus members. I want to thank President Zuma and the leadership for entrusting me with this responsibility.'
Responding to the rumoured petition against her, Makhubele said, 'There is no such letter. I haven't seen it. The caucus hasn't seen it. We're coming from a caucus meeting, and we're all shocked. It has dented our image, and we want to ensure this never happens again.'
She emphasised that the MKP caucus is made up of members from diverse political backgrounds but unified under one constitutional vision.
'All of us, whether we came from COPE, ACDP, the DA or the Patriotic Alliance, have aligned ourselves with the MK Party constitution and the people's mandate,' she said.
Hlophe added that the restructuring of the party's parliamentary leadership, including the removal of a dedicated whip for communications, was part of a broader shift to prioritise legislative and constitutional work.
'We don't want to be just an opposition party,' he said. 'We regard ourselves as a government in waiting. That means realigning how we work in Parliament so that we're not only active, but effective.'
The party also introduced its new portfolio leaders, described as equivalent to shadow ministers, who will lead on key areas such as public service, land reform, and economic transformation.
Makhubele said the MKP's legislative priorities will include land expropriation without compensation, decolonisation of the economy, and constitutional recognition of traditional leaders.
'This is why we are aligning our whippery to our strategic vision. The whip on legislation is critical for us. When we come into power, there are specific laws we want to govern with, and we must already be preparing the ground for that,' she said.
She also committed to stronger constituency work and deeper public engagement: 'We want our presence in committees and Parliament to have an impact. We are going to mobilise our grassroots and sharpen our focus to deal with the failures of the so-called Government of National Unity.'
Hlophe concluded by urging the public and media to distinguish between internal party administration and deliberate misinformation.
'These are operational changes, not a caucus crisis,' he said. 'The Chief Whip is not going anywhere.'
mandilakhe.tshwete@inl.co.za
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
18 minutes ago
- The Star
There is no link between the name ‘Azania' and the indigenous people of South Africa
Kenneth Mokgatlhe | Published 22 minutes ago We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name, says the writer. Image: Picture: Henk Kruger/ Independent Newspapers The proposal of constitutional amendment by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to change the name of South Africa to the 'Republic of Azania' is nonsensical, unnecessary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of this place. We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name. It was during my time as a young and vibrant activist within the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) that I was firmly convinced that South Africa should be renamed 'Azania'. I had been persuaded by the existing argument that 'South' was merely a geographical direction and therefore did not have substantive cultural and historical connections befitting a nation's identity. However, I later realised that my comprehension of the term 'Azania' was very limited to its use within Pan Africanist and Black Consciousness discourses. Never mind my strong ideological conviction and commitment, I was unable to intellectually express a clear historical or cultural justification for the adoption of the name, nor could I trace its relevance in juxtaposition to the people, history, and identity of the country. It is important to note that the name 'Azania' has no historical or cultural connection to my people. It was never part of our vocabulary or identity. The term did not exist in our oral traditions or historical records, and my community had never encountered it before modern political movements began to invoke it. It is important to note that the pre-colonial South African society was home to various independent kingdoms and queendoms, each governed by its rulers. I descend from the Bahurutshe, one of the largest sub-groups of the Batswana people, who previously occupied the area now known as the Marico region or Zeerust. Our ancestors referred to their kingdom as Kaditshwene (a place of baboons) and Tshwenyane (a little baboon), an ancient twin-city settlement that thrived between 1300 to 1884. Like many other indigenous polities, it functioned as a sovereign polity, free from foreign or external domination. There was a dramatic shift in the geopolitical landscape after the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European powers gathered to partition Africa among themselves, which laid the foundation for the modern nation-states we recognise today. As a result, we — descendants of various kingdoms — were forced to adapt to these new political realities and form countries under Western-imposed frameworks. A country known as the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, led and governed by white minority rule. A referendum was held in 1960, where white South Africans decided to leave the Commonwealth, became independent, and referred to themselves as the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961. While the name 'South Africa' is descriptive of a geographic location, the name gives a strong cultural, political, and historical connection. It reminds us of different epochs in our history and how we interacted with other countries. The name South Africa is not unique in the world, as other countries have historically adopted names which are geographically descriptive of their land, such as South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR), North and South Korea, North Macedonia, and East Timor. My discomfort at the term Azania was vindicated after I came across one of the compelling writings of South African freedom fighter and journalist Paul Trewhela, who is now based in the United Kingdom. Through his sharp historical analysis, he provides a well-substantiated account of the origins of the name 'Azania', demonstrating that it was a term imposed by slave traders/masters to demean the Black Africans in some parts of East Africa. Trewhela contends that the name 'Azania' does not bear any link to the indigenous peoples of South Africa and carries connotations or implications of oppression rather than liberation. His esteemed scholarship helped clarify that the name 'Azania' lacks authentic historical, cultural, political, or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing my earlier doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name. 'The name 'Azania' celebrates the centuries of enslavement of black Africans by Islamist Arab imperialism down the east coast of Africa. It is a disgrace for reactionary ideologists to be using this concocted name to replace the name South Africa,' he remarked. This name, 'Azania,' is primarily used by individuals who identify themselves as revolutionaries or radicals within South Africa's academic, political, and social spheres. It is largely preferred by black radicals in academia and by political formations considered to be on the far left, such as the PAC, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and trade unions affiliated with the National Council of Trade Union (NACTU), among others. Like I once did in the past, many of these individuals adopt the term 'Azania' as a symbolic rejection of apartheid and white supremacy. Their chief motivation emanates from a desire to eliminate any association with the apartheid regime, including the name 'South Africa', which they regard as a legacy of colonialism and racial oppression. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
IOL News
30 minutes ago
- IOL News
There is no link between the name ‘Azania' and the indigenous people of South Africa
We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name, says the writer. Image: Picture: Henk Kruger/ Independent Newspapers The proposal of constitutional amendment by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to change the name of South Africa to the 'Republic of Azania' is nonsensical, unnecessary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of this place. We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name. It was during my time as a young and vibrant activist within the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) that I was firmly convinced that South Africa should be renamed 'Azania'. I had been persuaded by the existing argument that 'South' was merely a geographical direction and therefore did not have substantive cultural and historical connections befitting a nation's identity. However, I later realised that my comprehension of the term 'Azania' was very limited to its use within Pan Africanist and Black Consciousness discourses. Never mind my strong ideological conviction and commitment, I was unable to intellectually express a clear historical or cultural justification for the adoption of the name, nor could I trace its relevance in juxtaposition to the people, history, and identity of the country. It is important to note that the name 'Azania' has no historical or cultural connection to my people. It was never part of our vocabulary or identity. The term did not exist in our oral traditions or historical records, and my community had never encountered it before modern political movements began to invoke it. It is important to note that the pre-colonial South African society was home to various independent kingdoms and queendoms, each governed by its rulers. I descend from the Bahurutshe, one of the largest sub-groups of the Batswana people, who previously occupied the area now known as the Marico region or Zeerust. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Our ancestors referred to their kingdom as Kaditshwene (a place of baboons) and Tshwenyane (a little baboon), an ancient twin-city settlement that thrived between 1300 to 1884. Like many other indigenous polities, it functioned as a sovereign polity, free from foreign or external domination. There was a dramatic shift in the geopolitical landscape after the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European powers gathered to partition Africa among themselves, which laid the foundation for the modern nation-states we recognise today. As a result, we — descendants of various kingdoms — were forced to adapt to these new political realities and form countries under Western-imposed frameworks. A country known as the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, led and governed by white minority rule. A referendum was held in 1960, where white South Africans decided to leave the Commonwealth, became independent, and referred to themselves as the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961. While the name 'South Africa' is descriptive of a geographic location, the name gives a strong cultural, political, and historical connection. It reminds us of different epochs in our history and how we interacted with other countries. The name South Africa is not unique in the world, as other countries have historically adopted names which are geographically descriptive of their land, such as South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR), North and South Korea, North Macedonia, and East Timor. My discomfort at the term Azania was vindicated after I came across one of the compelling writings of South African freedom fighter and journalist Paul Trewhela, who is now based in the United Kingdom. Through his sharp historical analysis, he provides a well-substantiated account of the origins of the name 'Azania', demonstrating that it was a term imposed by slave traders/masters to demean the Black Africans in some parts of East Africa. Trewhela contends that the name 'Azania' does not bear any link to the indigenous peoples of South Africa and carries connotations or implications of oppression rather than liberation. His esteemed scholarship helped clarify that the name 'Azania' lacks authentic historical, cultural, political, or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing my earlier doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name. 'The name 'Azania' celebrates the centuries of enslavement of black Africans by Islamist Arab imperialism down the east coast of Africa. It is a disgrace for reactionary ideologists to be using this concocted name to replace the name South Africa,' he remarked. This name, 'Azania,' is primarily used by individuals who identify themselves as revolutionaries or radicals within South Africa's academic, political, and social spheres. It is largely preferred by black radicals in academia and by political formations considered to be on the far left, such as the PAC, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and trade unions affiliated with the National Council of Trade Union (NACTU), among others. Like I once did in the past, many of these individuals adopt the term 'Azania' as a symbolic rejection of apartheid and white supremacy. Their chief motivation emanates from a desire to eliminate any association with the apartheid regime, including the name 'South Africa', which they regard as a legacy of colonialism and racial oppression. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
The South African
7 hours ago
- The South African
'We'll never allow it': EFF vows to 'stop' Starlink in SA
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have doubled down on the rejection of Starlink being granted a licence to operate in South Africa. This comes after Elon Musk's internet satellite service company is reportedly planning to 'work around' the country's Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policies, which require a stake in local shareholding for foreign investors. Musk has repeatedly slammed the transformative legislation as a 'racist law', he claims discriminates against him as he is 'not black'. Addressing parliament on Friday, 11 July, EFF spokesperson Sinawe Thambo rejected Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies Solly Malatsi's plan to introduce equity equivalent investment programmes (EEIPs) as an alternative to transformative legislation like BEE. He said: 'This is a proposal we've objected to because the so-called alignment would require an amendment to legislation. And can't be achieved through a ministerial policy directive.' Elon Musk's plan to launch Starlink in South Africa has been met by heavy opposition. Images via X: @starlink Referring to Starlink creator Elon Musk, Thambo continued: 'We will never allow Starlink, which has weaponised misinformation and captured the White House, to erode US and South African diplomatic relations in order to ease business access in South Africa. 'We view that as economic and diplomatic terrorism. Even if Starlink were to meet equity equivalence requirements, there's a security threat that it poses. That means it must never be allowed to operate in South Africa. And we will never allow it to do so'. In May, Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies Solly Malatsi gazetted a policy direction for his department on EEIPs, which are considered 'alternatives' to transformative legislation. Without mentioning Starlink, the minister claimed that the policy would 'attract investment,' specifically in operating licensing. The minister revealed that current legislation for foreign investments 'did not allow companies to contribute to transformation goals in ways other than traditional ownership'. Last month, Business Day reported that Starlink, which falls under SpaceX, is looking to invest over R2 billion in South Africa as part of its prospective deal to operate in the country. The internet satellite company will reportedly finance infrastructure to support the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which is made up of 16 countries. The move is thought to be a way to 'work around' local BEE policies, which require foreign investors to hold 30% of the local shares. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
