Sequestration ruling puts Malema political future in balance

A Business Day report notes Malema has until 26 May to provide reasons why the provisional order should not be confirmed. If the order is finalised, any political aspirations he may have for a seat in Parliament would be dashed, as being an unrehabilitated insolvent prevents him from being a member of the National Assembly, notes the report. Malema has consistently blamed his legal woes on political meddling. The SARS launched the application for sequestration over a R16 tax debt relating to assessed income tax, additional tax and interest for 2005-2011. The additional income was derived from the Ratanang Family Trust, which SARS claims is Malema's 'alter ego'. Yesterday, Malema's counsel, Dolf Mosoma, asked the court to postpone the application indefinitely to allow the criminal case against Malema, set to resume in September, to proceed. Malema also indicated that he would be applying for a declaratory order setting aside an admission of liability he made to SARS acknowledging his tax debt. However, Advocate Nick Maritz, on behalf of SARS, argued that even if Malema's admission of liability were to be ignored, it would not have an effect on the sequestration order. He added that SARS already had a judgment against Malema for the outstanding amount, granted in 2012, to which he failed to respond. In truth, he said, Malema feared for his future in politics. Full Business Day report (subscription needed)

Judge Bill Prinsloo labelled Malema's request for a postponement a 'delaying tactic' that the court would not tolerate. He added that Malema had ample time to make representations regarding the sequestration order, but had failed to do so. 'I am satisfied that the applicant (the SARS) has established the requirements for the grant of a provisional sequestration,' Prinsloo is quoted as saying in a BDlive report. A draft order was signed and made an order of the court. Malema has until 10am on 26 May to give reasons why the order should not be made final. Full BDlive report

Malema has sworn to fight the provisional sequestration, declaring the court challenge a political attack, notes a Mail & Guardian Online report. 'I am going to Parliament,' he reportedly told the M&G yesterday. 'I will continue to challenge it up to the Constitutional Court because this is a political game,' Malema said. 'Now the sequestration is a last attack: they think that through sequestration they will prevent me from participating in Parliament. Like it or not they can see me there. I'm going to appeal that decision.' Section 47(c) of the Constitution prevents rehabilitated insolvents from serving as members of Parliament, a provision that could thwart Malema's political ambitions, says the report. EFF spokesperson Mbuyiseni Ndlozi released a statement saying the provisional liquidation did not disqualify him to stand for public office, 'as some sections of the media suggested'. But a legal expert told the M&G that a provisional liquidation has the same legal binding as a permanent liquidation, referring to section 2 of the Insolvency Act that states that a 'sequestration order means any order of court whereby an estate is sequestrated and includes a provisional order, when it has not been set aside'. Full Mail & Guardian Online report