South Africa on the verge of facing serious threat to its democracy

IT HAS been nearly 27 years since Nelson Mandela was formally inaugurated as the first democratic president of South Africa.

However, South Africa’s democracy is tested by dislodging corrupt networks of state capture rooted under the administration of former president Jacob Zuma.

Since the transition to a democratic state, South Africa has held several peaceful, fair and competitive elections which however discounts the country’s level of democracy if it had to be assessed on electoral competitiveness.

But recently South Africa has faced a much more complex and tougher test in the resistance of state capture.

In 2016, former public protector Thuli Madonsela announced that she would be conducting an extensive investigation into what is called state capture, after her office received several complaints from members of faithbased organisations, opposition parties and even ordinary citizens.

After two years of investigation by the office of the public protector, some damaging evidence surfaced which linked several business elites and public officials to state corruption.

The commission of inquiry into the allegations of the state capture headed by deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo was then formed.

Two years, six months and 13 days into the state capture inquiry, where several officials, business elites and politicians generously appeared before the commission, yet for one person it was such a difficult task to testify on allegations of corruption, the root of it all, Zuma.

The one man who is alleged to have orchestrated South Africa’s state corruption has side-stepped his appearance at the commission several times to date.

Does former presidential powers give you the constitutional right to skip appearances at the state capture commission?

According to section 6 of The Commission Act: “Any person summoned to attend and give evidence before a commission who fails to attend at the time and place as specified by the summons shall be guilty of an offence and shall be held liable on conviction to a fine or even imprisonment that does not exceed six months. Both punishments can be imposed.”

With a well comprehended act in place the former president still tends to undermine the seriousness of the Zondo commission by exhaling all sorts of excuses.

Jacob Zuma argues that he cannot appear before deputy chief justice Zondo because of a well-founded apprehension of bias and a history of personal relations between the deputy chief justice and himself. How absurd.

However, in a recent ruling by the Constitutional Court it was declared that the former president should appear before the commission and has no right to remain silent during his appearances. Zuma failed to answer more than 30 questions during his first appearance in July 2019.

This is another insolent move by the former president to undermine the works of the commission, blatantly disregarding the rule of law.

The former president plays a significant role in the investigation.

He’s the centre of the state capture inquiry. The allegations brought forward by the public protector are so serious and if found true it can become a huge threat to the country’s fledgling democracy.

Zuma has undeniably breached the Commissions Act, but no legal steps have been taken against him. This raises the question of the level of democracy and the rule of law in South Africa. Are certain individuals above the law based on their strong history in politics or because of their former positions?

South Africa is on the verge of facing a threat to its democracy, the damage wreaked by the state capture goes over and beyond just corruption and the theft of public resources.

For over 20 years there has been a mandate to redress the social, political and economic inequalities. These still exist post 1994. Then the state capture corruption came along and dissipated the opportunities to address South Africa’s deep social and economic challenges but more daringly create a space of distrust in democracy and the state.

Has it really been more than R500 billion that may have been stolen during Zuma’s nine years of administration or could it exceed R1 trillion?

Well, without Zuma’s testimony the commission simply cannot conclude its work.