- The party says the commission went to court after remarks by Duduzane Zuma and youth leader Qiniso Cibane at an Umlazi event.
- It says Cibane has been counselled to be more careful and acknowledges court outcomes that cleared the commission.
The uMkhonto weSizwe Party says it has buried the hatchet with the Electoral Commission after a court dispute over allegations that the commission manipulated the 2024 election results.
In a statement dated 10 November, the party said the two sides had agreed to withdraw the court application and the party’s opposition to it.
The dispute followed remarks made at a public event in Umlazi on 25 October by the party’s first deputy president, Duduzane Zuma, and its youth league president, Qiniso Cibane.
According to the statement, the commission launched an urgent application in the Durban High Court after the remarks, which largely concerned allegations of manipulation of the 2024 results. The commission denies those allegations.
The party said it remained unhappy about aspects of that election but accepted the outcomes of the court processes.
“Although the MK Party and its leadership remain aggrieved about certain aspects of the 2024 elections, the Party respects the outcomes of the relevant court processes, which absolved the Commission,” it said.
“Any contrary impression is therefore regrettable.”
The party said it had investigated Cibane’s remarks. It described his engagements as “particularly, and typically, robust” but said he had not intended to undermine the commission’s credibility.
It also distanced itself from any suggestion that the commission had overreacted by taking legal action.
“On the contrary, internal measures have already been taken to counsel Comrade Cibane to be more circumspect in the future. He has readily accepted such counsel,” the statement said.
The party did not give details of those internal measures.
It said both sides had agreed to “let bygones be bygones” by withdrawing the application and the opposition to it.
The agreement, it said, was reached in the hope that lessons had been learnt and “in the spirit of tolerance for robust debate, which must never be allowed to cross acceptable lines”.
