Inquiry delay could suggest DA plot

Senior Democratic Alliance leaders have urged the party’s Federal Legal Commission (FLC) to speedily conclude an investigation into a leadership dispute before an elective federal congress due in April, saying failure to do so could be seen as a ploy to undermine leader John Steenhuisen’s bid for a third term.

At least three senior DA leaders, including provincial and federal council members, told the Mail & Guardian that there was unease within the party about the timing of the probe being perceived internally as a factional tactic to sideline or eliminate Steenhuisen from the race.

But DA federal council chairperson Helen Zille this week rejected claims that either she or any faction aligned to her was seeking to hurt Steenhuisen’s chances.

The FLC disciplinary inquiry centres on public accusations traded between the DA leader and federal finance chairperson Dion George, who was fired by President Cyril Ramaphosa as environment minister last year, at Steenhuisen’s request. 

A statement from Zille on Monday said it would determine whether either or both Steenhuisen or George violated sections of the DA’s federal constitution, relating to bringing the party into disrepute, reflecting negatively on the party and undermining internal co-operation. 

Zille said the DA’s Federal Executive Committee had requested the FLC to “pursue all the inquiries on an expedited basis, giving it priority over other pending matters”.

George quit the DA and resigned as an MP on Thursday, saying the situation had become “intolerable”.

A party leader, who spoke to the Mail & Guardian on condition of anonymity, said there was a fear that if the issue was not resolved quickly “it will be seen as a political manoeuvre rather than a disciplinary process”, with leadership nominations expected to open in the coming weeks. “That perception alone is damaging going into a leadership contest,” they said.

Steenhuisen, who was re-elected with a large majority at the DA’s 2023 congress, confirmed his intention to seek another term as party leader in June last year during the party’s 25th celebration. 

This week, Zille told the M&G that the allegations circulating within party structures— that she was playing a role in efforts to weaken Steenhuisen’s position — were “a total invention”.

“It is entirely untrue as anyone who knows what is going on understands. My job is to preserve the DA’s institutions and make sure they work well for everyone, and are not weaponised in any internal squabbles,” she said.

As federal council chairperson, Zille also chairs the federal executive, the party’s highest decision-making body between congresses, which oversees the work of the Federal Legal Commission.

The DA leaders who spoke to the M&G said that while Steenhuisen remained the party’s preferred candidate, there was a faction seeking to remove him from power, pointing to the party’s national election results as part of the reason.

In the 2024 general election, the DA led by Steenhuisen won 21.81% of the national vote, maintaining its position as the second-largest party but failing to achieve significant growth. This was down from the 22.20% secured in the 2014 election under Zille, although it was an improvement from the 20.77% garnered in 2019 under former leader Mmusi Maimane. 

Several officials said internal discussions had focused on the party’s inability to expand beyond its core voter base, despite heightened expectations before the election.

“The debate within the DA centres on whether leadership stability under Steenhuisen offers the best chance of consolidation, or whether the party requires a strategic reset after limited electoral growth,” one leader said.

The dispute between Steenhuisen and George was referred to the Federal Legal Commission after a recommendation by the DA’s Tagging Committee, which assesses complaints and determines whether they warrant investigation under the party’s constitution.

“When an issue is referred to the Federal Legal Commission, and the Tagging Committee decides to refer it for investigation, that is what happens, and we await the outcome,” Zille told the M&G.

The referral followed months of escalating tension between the two leaders, including public allegations and counter-allegations that brought the dispute into the public domain.

The conflict intensified after George was axed in November and replaced by former DA spokesperson  Aucamp. After his removal, George accused Steenhuisen of misconduct, including allegations related to the use of a DA-issued credit card. He also lodged complaints with the Public Protector and raised concerns about what he described as irregular conduct within the party.

Steenhuisen denied the allegations. A preliminary FLC inquiry found no evidence that he misused party funds, concluding that all expenditure on the credit card had been reconciled and any personal expenses had been reimbursed.

The party has warned members that public commentary on internal disputes  could constitute a breach of the DA constitution and result in disciplinary action, including the possible termination of membership. Zille said the directive was aimed at protecting the integrity of the investigation and limiting reputational damage to the party before the congress.

According to the DA’s constitution, the FLC is empowered to investigate disputes referred to it by the Federal Executive and to make binding findings, including disciplinary sanctions. The constitution also requires that any member seeking election to a party leadership position be a member in good standing.

Under the party’s constitution adopted in April 2023, members who are subject to disciplinary findings or who are suspended pending the outcome of disciplinary processes may be ineligible to contest leadership positions, depending on the findings of the FLC and subsequent decisions by party structures.

Some DA members have argued that the investigation reflected deepening factional divisions and was being used to weaken Steenhuisen before the leadership contest. Zille rejected the characterisation.

“People say all sorts of things, without any understanding of the situation. The DA has said all it wishes to say on this matter,” she said.

Zille has repeatedly said she did not intend to contest the party’s top leadership position and has denied backing any challenger.

Internal debate has intensified around the party’s leadership options. At least five DA provincial leaders, speaking to the M&G on condition of anonymity, said they supported Steenhuisen’s bid for re-election, arguing that there was no suitable alternative within the party.

They said there was concern about repeating what they described as strategic mistakes made during  Maimane’s leadership, a period they said coincided with a loss of support to parties such as the Freedom Front Plus. Internal assessments within the party have linked the decline to voter discomfort over leadership changes and perceptions about electability, they noted.

While Cape Town mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis and Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi have been mentioned internally as possible future leadership contenders, neither has indicated an intention to run. “As of now, they have both not shown interest in the matter, according to my knowledge,” one provincial leader said. 

The debate around the two is that they do not have enough experience for national leadership. Hill-Lewis has previously said he would not contest the leadership while Steenhuisen remains a candidate. Malatsi has not publicly commented on speculation about leadership ambitions.

By the time of going to print, both members had not responded to questions from the M&G.

The DA has reiterated its commitment to due process and internal accountability and has declined to comment further on the allegations while the investigation continues. 

Party leaders say they will await the outcome of the commission’s process as preparations for the April congress move into their final phase.