The uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) Party said on Monday it has directed its attorneys to urgently seek an interdict from the Constitutional Court to postpone the first sittings of the National Assembly and National Council of Provinces, and to interdict the swearing in of party nominated candidates as members of the National Assembly until its grievances are thoroughly addressed by the courts.

Parliament is due to hold its first sittings, which will take place at the Cape Town International Convention Centre.

The MK Party intends approaching the court, seeking that the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) set aside the 2024 election results.

The party alleged there were incidents of voter rigging in the May 29 general elections, where the party secured 45 seats in the KZN Legislature and 58 in the National Assembly.

The MK Party said that legally, the absence of MK Party members from Parliament will prevent achieving the composition of the 350 members required to lawfully constitute the National Assembly, saying this will further invalidate the session which aims to appoint a President and the government of the country.

The MK Party highlighted that despite the party’s objections as submitted to the IEC, Parliament's response disregarded the party’s request by spearheading an agenda to proceed regardless of such concerns which it says are “serious” in nature.

On Friday the MK Party’s legal representatives issued a formal demand to Chief Justice Raymond Zondo and the Secretary to Parliament Xolile George, arguing that unresolved objections by MK Party and other political parties who represent the will of the people, render this a "market-based" declaration, and consequently the sitting and all its activities unconstitutional.

“…we are compelled to express grave concerns about the Secretary of Parliament, but most crucially the Chief Justice for their premature statement or judgments regarding issues related to the matter at hand, knowing that the matter may end up in court,” said the party.

MK Party said it was concerned that “such types of prejudicial statements and pronouncements” could compromise the impartiality required if this matter ends up in court.

“Sadly, such conduct, which continues unabated especially by the Chief Justice, further undermines public confidence in essential State institutions, including Parliament and the judiciary as a whole,” it averred.