Parliament’s lawyers refuse to concede that Zackie Achmat is Zackie Achmat
#UniteBehind accuses Parliament of delaying state capture ethics case
Add GroundUp on Google
#UniteBehind says Parliament’s lawyers have used legal technicalities to stall judgment on complaints against six ANC MPs for nearly two years. Archive photo: James Stent
- In August 2025, #UniteBehind squared off against Parliament in front of a full bench of the Western Cape High Court.
- The case dealt with state capture allegations against six ANC MPs.
- The judges said they could not decide the matter until a technical issue over the deposition of an affidavit by Zackie Achmat was resolved.
- At the time Parliament’s lawyers opposed an amended affidavit filed by Achmat.
- Now, in a letter to Parliament, #UniteBehind says Parliament’s lawyers are delaying judgment over minor technical issues: the commissioning advocate’s address and Zackie Achmat’s name change.
- Should Parliament’s lawyers continue with their opposition, the next available date for a hearing is only April 2027.
- #UniteBehind is considering approaching the Constitutional Court and wants Parliament to explain the cost of the prolonged litigation.
While #UniteBehind’s court bid to hold six ANC MP’s accountable for their roles in state capture was heard in August last year, the judgment cannot be delivered because Parliament’s lawyers are “abusing the judicial process”, the activist group claims.
In 2022, #UniteBehind laid complaints in terms of Parliament’s code of conduct against six ANC MPs who were implicated in state capture, including corruption at the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA). They were Fikile Mbalula, Mosebenzi Zwane, Joe Maswanganyi, Dikeledi Magazi, Sfiso Buthelezi, and Dipuo Peters.
Then in April 2023, #UniteBehind launched proceedings in the Western Cape High Court against the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members Interests for failing to act “diligently”, accusing the committee of “an unreasonable, and unexplained, delay in handling the complaints”.
However, in February 2025, the organisation was forced to amend the relief it sought in its notice of motion after discovering that a new code of conduct had been adopted.
#UniteBehind claims this was done without public participation or it being alerted to the fact, in spite of the litigation.
While the matter was argued in August 2025 before a full bench of three judges, Parliament’s lawyers opposed the admission of the amended affidavit deposed to by #UniteBehind director Zackie Achmat.
The judges agreed to hear the matter regardless, but noted that judgment could not be delivered until the issue was finally resolved, either through agreement between the parties or through further court action.
#UniteBehind says Parliament’s lawyers are sticking to their guns.
Meanwhile, the first available date for a hearing is April 2027.
“It’s enough to make a comedian weep,” Achmat and the group’s executive director, Zukiswa Fokazi, say in a letter to Parliament dated early August 2026.
They say the issues Parliament’s lawyers have raised with the amended affidavit are twofold: the advocate who commissioned it failed to add his address; and then they attacked Achmat’s character by “challenging his lawful name change from Adurrazack to Zackie”.
Because advocate Darryll Cooke had referred to Achmat as Adurrazack in his confirmatory affidavit, lawyers for Parliament claimed they could not confirm that “advocate’s Cooke’s affidavit related to the same deponent as the original affidavit”.
In the letter to Parliament, Achmat and Fokazi say that every President since 1994, has known Achmat as “Zackie Achmat”.
“Parliament’s counsel has demanded that we bring a new application to admit the affidavit and prove that Zackie Achmat is Zackie Achmat, despite the fact that the judges of the high court have already heard the entire matter and could hand down judgment tomorrow if they choose.”
They said at a case management meeting on Friday, 31 July, the judges had indicated that the application could be decided through oral argument but the earliest available hearing might only be in April 2027.
“Alternatively, if the matter is allocated to a differently constituted bench, it will be required to be heard de novo and further delays are likely to arise.
“#UniteBehind is now confronted with a conundrum. We wait until April 2027 for a hearing almost five years after the complaints were lodged [with the ethics committee] or we start afresh. We are considering approaching the Constitutional Court on an urgent basis to finalise the matter and to order personal costs against all respondents and counsel.”
The organisation has demanded that Parliament give “lawful instructions” to its lawyers so that the matter can be finalised.
It also wants to know how much the case has cost the state so far.
GroundUp sent a request for comment to the office of the Speaker of Parliament but has yet to receive a response.
Support independent journalism
Donate using Payfast
Don't miss out on the latest news
We respect your privacy, and promise we won't spam you.
© 2026 GroundUp. This article is published under the GroundUp Republication Licence Version 1.0. Email [email protected] to request permission to republish.