Better that Zuma preceded Ramaphosa
Imagine if it was Cyril Ramaphosa who had made way for Jacob Zuma on that Nasrec stage at the ANC’s elective conference in December — what implications would that have had for SA?
What awful fate would have befallen the country? Had that been the scenario in December, SA might have had Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki and perhaps Ramaphosa serving in succession in the highest office, followed by a Zuma era.
The air is still thick with the euphoria brought on by Ramaphosa’s ascension to power, and his rousing state of the nation address on Friday evening has left many with a sense of renewal.
But the reality on the ground does not escape many public servants — both former and serving — who saw first-hand the devastation wrought on the system by the Zuma administration and his army of loyal lieutenants.
No amount of optimism can mask the ugly truth of the systematic erosion of the public service under Zuma and his acolytes, many of whom are now seeking to rebrand themselves after the fact.
The issue was crystallised by veteran technocrat Ismail Momoniat, the Treasury’s deputy director-general for tax, at the University of the Witwatersrand Business School late last week, during a discussion on money laundering and state capture.
Momoniat, who has served under a succession of finance ministers, was the last speaker on Thursday evening. His revelation that those who had dared speak out or act against wrongdoing during Zuma’s tenure risked being fired drew gasps from the crowd.
Here was a serving official at the coalface of the public service, taking the citizenry behind the veil of secrecy and confirming what many had long suspected about how Zuma dealt with dissent. Many in the audience left shocked while digesting his words.
Many in the public service were victimised if they spoke out, from MPs, MPLs and councillors to directors-general and some ministers.
Union federation Cosatu and the South African Communist Party (SACP) helped prop up a culture of fear. In the case of Cosatu, look no further than the expulsions of the National Union of Metalworkers of SA and Zwelinzima Vavi, in the name of Zuma.
Then there was the bullying that former Young Communist League general secretary Mazibuko Jara was subjected to before his eventual expulsion.
The nature of his crime? Jara wrote a long-form piece in which he cautioned against the cult of Zuma before it took hold and its roots constricted the system. Jara predicted what a destructive force on state institutions the Zuma tsunami — to borrow from Vavi — would be, especially on the poor and most vulnerable of society.
He did this long before condemnation of Zuma became fashionable, when there was a high price to pay for speaking truth to power.
SA has had a taste of administrative mediocrity, embodied in Zuma’s government by the likes of, among others, Bathabile Dlamini, Des van Rooyen, Bongani Bongo, Mosebenzi Zwane and Lynne Brown.
Back to the question I posed in the introductory paragraph: what if it was Ramaphosa who had given way to Zuma in December? The answer is that the years spent building the state and public service machinery would have been laid to waste. Perhaps it was best — not necessarily ideal — that Zuma came to power when he did, instead of now.
The Zuma moment tested the resilience of the public service and state institutions. Some failed while others shone.
Zuma’s administration has showed SA what a collapsed state might look like, but thanks to the bravery of a few, the country did not go over the edge. May the contributions of those who stood up never be forgotten in the rush to revise our recent history.