Vote outcome does not bode well for clean governance

AS we awake to the reality of another failed attempt to rid the country of President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma we have every reason to celebrate as a country, despite the undesirability of the outcome of the no-confidence vote to those who cherish clean governance.

The results don’t bode well for good governance because Zuma has been found guilty of violating his oath of office, has misled parliament on the Nkandla matter, and is allegedly involved in state capture, which has evidently cost billions of rands.

As such, he has not only been found wanting on a test of upholding the rule of law but also on the qualifying criteria of the ANC’s Through the Eye of the Needle and leadership renewal documents, which value good repute and integrity.

The fact that National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete on Monday granted voting by secret ballot on the motion, should be seen as a victory for constitutionalism and the rule of law.

Mbete based her decision strongly on the letter of the constitution and the underlying values of accountability and transparency as guided by the Constitutional Court’s judgment on the matter.

Also, how she handled the inquiry about the number of votes required to determine a majority of votes of 50% plus one seeing that five members were absent, showed due care to legal correctness.

Mbete had earned a reputation for being biased. Her loyalty on many occasions was clearly to the ANC and the person of Jacob Zuma more than the values of accountable, fair and democratic governance.

The outcome of the vote has shown the people of South Africa the inherent weakness in our system of democracy.

The Westminster parliamentary system, which South Africa opted for, is known for its relative weakness when it comes to effective parliamentary oversight over the executive.

That is because the cabinet is elected from members of the majority party in parliament. These members get to be elected into parliament on the basis of a closed party list, leaving them at the mercy of their party to be deployed, not of the voters directly.

However, the ANC’s mishandling of Zuma is more about its moral degeneration and ethical bankruptcy than about inherent systemic weakness.

The party promised clean governance to the people of South Africa in its manifestos in 2014 and last year.

As such, it should have provided leadership by recalling the president as soon as allegations suggesting that he might be involved in corruption surfaced.

The evidence that its powers had been usurped and delegated to unconstitutional private interests was made very clear when Zuma unilaterally reshuffled his cabinet despite strong disapproval by the ANC.

The failure of the party to act is the strongest indication that it is not just Zuma but the entire leadership of the party that has betrayed the people of South Africa.

The party will pay a heavy price in 2019 for its complicity in state capture and advancing what may legitimately be called the “kleptocratic project of 2007” when Zuma became the president of the party.