SA needs electoral review
THE deliberations at the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa) resulted in an electoral system being adopted that, at the time, seemed appropriate to account for the aspirations of the majority of citizens.
While no electoral system is perfect, the idea of public representation must ensure accountability to the electorate first and foremost.
Bearing this in mind, it is my firm contention that, after 23 years of democratic order, there needs to be a serious review for constitutional and electoral reforms.
The failed motion of no-confidence in Jacob Zuma’s presidency in Parliament highlights this explicitly.
The genesis of our democracy has presented many challenges, not least that of an indubitable zest for power as exhibited by the ANC, whose incumbent leader once declared their rule would last until the second coming of Jesus Christ.
It would not be incorrect to suggest that the electorate is implored for support primarily on the basis of party manifestos more so than individual capabilities and any commitment of service for the greater good.
How many people actually know who their MPS are that represent them? This highest tier of government is rarely seen in any of their constituencies, save for interaction with their respective parties.
Zuma cannot claim to be a president elected by the people, for his election to the office was effected through party lines, in a process incongruent with the concept of a true democracy.
In the DA, for example, during selection for proportional representation positions the jostling of individuals who want positions as career politicians is a sight to behold.
A good number of candidates seek the approval of the “decisionmakers” in the most despicable manner, despite the DA bleating about “open opportunity, transparency and accountability”.
Such practices are not foreign to other political parties as they undergo the same mechanisms of selection, which again goes against the grain of true democracy.
The proportional representation system is becoming the bane of a constitutional democracy that made us proud.
It is reducing the representation of the people to the whims and fancies of others who do not have a direct mandate to choose public representatives.
This is a potential danger that is being exposed as our current political disposition degenerates in ways we never imagined – and we cannot make excuses for these realities by saying it is the best system under the circumstances – because it is certainly not.
England employs the “surgery” system, which in part gives constituents an opportunity to directly interact with the MPS they vote in and this should be given serious thought. Mandates for change must come from the people, not the political parties.
As we plod along with a system that ultimately fails the general electorate, we will always be reminded that the greatness of a democracy rests on the premise: a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Nothing less will do.
NARENDH GANESH Durban North