Churches must play greater role
PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma’s two-term limit as head of government is due to end his reign in 2019. Will he readily accept this legal requirement to step down, or will he try to finagle a third term in defiance of the constitution to which he has twice sworn allegiance?
Whatever the answer, few informed observers can now believe that he will be able to hang on to power as long as he would like. These are his end times – the use of this Biblical term is appropriate not only because of the inevitable doom it suggests, but because the president himself has now added a theological dimension to his pronouncements.
He has found a new alleged villain to blame for his crumbled credibility: the churches, which he sees as unacceptably poking their collective nose into politics. By doing this, Zuma has unwittingly put his finger on a cardinal weakness of our system of government: we have a constitution which does not sufficiently recognise the spiritual foundations on which our society should be built.
While much of our problem today is indeed due to Zuma’s character and his lack of leadership skills, that isn’t the whole story. We also have a constitution which has failed us as an instrument of moral requirement.
It was created at a time when racism was regarded as our country’s key moral issue. It’s thus no surprise that the ANC to this day continues to use racism as a convenient excuse for everything, pointing to it as the enduring moral issue of our time.
Yet there is so much wrong with South Africa that racism, present or past, can no longer explain our broken government. The truth is that while our constitution pays lip service to many moral principles cribbed from other founding documents, it doesn’t provide the moral framework needed to govern South Africa in the 21st century.
Its political vision, based on secular neo-liberal capitalism, has played into the hands of cynical schemers. In 1994, the need for government to be ethical seemed so obvious that it didn’t occur to anyone that the constitution should lay down spiritual values.
We had drunk from the cup of freedom and with Nelson Mandela in charge we thought everything was going to be well. Many elements of civil society, including churches, sat back thinking “the main job has been done”.
Much of Zuma’s arrogance ironically reminds us of the apartheid regimes, including his latest assault on the churches. We vividly recall P W Botha railing against non-DRC clerics, especially Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the South African Council of Churches, for daring to criticise apartheid.
History shows us that targeting the churches is the last resort act of failed governments which, drunk with power, have lost the ability to distinguish between the visible apparatus of the state and the invisible impulses that underlie and shape human existence.
Zuma’s arrogance seems to exceed even Botha’s. He believes he is above both statutory and moral law.
Even in his own party these delusions cause anxiety.
Remarkably for the head of a political party which rode to power on the moral platform of Mandela, Zuma apparently has no idea that there is a moral issue. For him the state is one thing only: a means to exercise power as he sees fit for the enjoyment of himself and his privileged coterie.
South Africans have rejected single-tribe nationalism in favour of a multicultural state governed by a democracy, yet Zuma has turned the ANC, or rather a privileged clique within it, into an exclusive super-tribe. The common good is supposed to be served as an overarching moral principal, fostering peace and healthy institutions in the interests of all, yet Zuma’s oligarchy dispenses patronage to a select few.
Our constitution ordains a separation of powers between the executive, judiciary, administration and Chapter 9 institutions, but Zuma rides roughshod over the independence of these branches of the state structure.
The government is supposed to be checked by extra-governmental authorities like churches and professional bodies, but Zuma recognises no authority but his own. No citizen is supposed to be above the law, yet Zuma regards himself as enjoying this special status.
Similarly, Zuma has repeatedly flouted many other constitutional requirements: the application of balanced judgment to right social wrongs; defence of the people against dangers including internal disturbance; the upholding of human rights to food, shelter, opportunity and public safety; the effective provision of heath and educational services, and other social amenities; the promotion of cultural diversity; the conduct of government in ways which are at all times transparent and accountable; the promotion of ecological sustainability and the promotion of a healthy economy.
In all these areas Zuma has ignored our constitution to such an extent that no thinking South African can any longer believe that the government takes its ruling document seriously. It is thus no longer enough to say that Zuma must go.
We also need a new and better constitution. No one wants a theocracy, but we must have a governing document which makes it harder for heads of government to ignore the fact that South Africa is a nation of not just moral but spiritual principles.
Our churches have a great role to play in framing a new constitution aimed at restoring our moral compass, but even before this is done, now is the time for churches to join in confronting Zuma’s regime with a moral critique and opposition as potent as the campaign which toppled apartheid. The churches can vigorously express what they understand God’s requirements for human society to be; they can guide politicians as to what governmental approaches would be ethically principled; they must condemn the moral violations of the present government and the churches must join in a coordinated national action to pray for politicians.
Andrew Tainton, Port Elizabeth