Parliament’s standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) should be a rare institution, one in which its members rise above party politics to ensure that public finances are squeaky clean or, if not, action is taken.

This is obviously an important function. It is this area of governance in which there is the greatest potential for corruption and through which vast amounts of public money could be lost. As such Scopa is key to ensuring that parliament’s role of overseeing the executive is carried out.

Developments around the committee- centred on its handling of the arms deal - have, however, threatened to undermine its integrity.

These include a series of moves by the ANC which appeared designed to use its majority to manipulate processes within the committee. Among these were the demotion of Andrew Feinstein, the fiercely independent leader of the ANC in the committee, by then ANC chief whip Tony Yengeni. Feinstein subsequently quit parliament.

They culminated in the resignation this week of Scopa chairman Gavin Woods, an IFP MP. Whatever his critics have to say about Woods, he applied himself tirelessly to what he saw as the broader responsibilities of Scopa. His resignation is consistent with his insistence on acting within the set of principles expected of the committee’s members. As he explained: "I cannot accept the outside interventions, and the complicity therewith by the majority of the committee’s members, which caused the committee to fail in its responsibility to parliament and the public."

Woods added, however, that he was also resignation allow for a fluidity in which Scopa could be re-established as a committee that exercises effective oversight.

The concerned parties - with the ANC leading the charge - must grasp this opportunity. It is not in South Africa’s interests for this committee to be partisan, or even perceived as such.