Zille in new race storm

Federal executive chair refers her own tweets for a ruling by party

SA’s official opposition party, the DA, is again embroiled in a race furore, with federal executive chair Helen Zille’s tweets at the centre of it.

Among other tweets in the past few days, Zille said there were more racist laws in a democratic SA than under apartheid.

“All racist laws are wrong. But permanent victimhood is too highly prized to recognise this,” she tweeted.

Zille has previously courted controversy for a number of comments on Twitter, including the infamous tweet that the legacy of colonialism was not only negative.

She has tweeted extensively on racially sensitive topics.

In one such tweet, she commented that SA’s last apartheid president, FW de Klerk, “decided to dismantle apartheid” and if he did not, the ANC, which now governs the country, would still “be bogged down in the mess of its so-called liberation camps and infighting”.

Her tweets have now been referred by Zille herself, and by two other complainants, to the party’s Federal Legal Commission (FLC).

DA federal council deputy chair Thomas Walters said the FLC would look at all relevant facts, the party’s constitution and policies, and advise the federal executive on the matter.

Gauteng MP Khume Ramulifho, in his formal complaint sent to party leader John Steenhuisen and to Walters, said he believed Zille’s tweets violated both the party’s constitution and its social media policy.

“Apartheid laws were racist [laws that] intended to discriminate [against] black people.

“They were denied access to basic human rights, they were segregated, they were arrested, they were murdered and went into exile fighting for a democratic SA.

“This is recognised by SA’s constitution and the DA’s federal constitution on values,” Ramulifho said.

Over the past few years, race has become the DA’s achilles heel as it navigates positions on race-based redress.

The party underwent mass leadership changes last year in the wake of a dismal performance at the polls in last year’s general election.

A review was conducted by an external panel after the election losses, and it was said that the party was “both uncertain and divided on how to approach the question of race and that this has had a particularly negative impact on its election performance”.

Since the leadership change, the party is seen as focusing heavily on winning back the support it lost during the elections, which significantly included conservative, white Afrikaans voters, who shifted their votes to the Freedom Front Plus (FF Plus).

Party members have also spoken out on Zille’s comments on social media this week, including former party spokesperson and MP Phumzile van Damme and party leader hopeful Mbali Ntuli.

Steenhuisen said in a written statement that SA is “an infinitely better, more just and humane society now than it was under apartheid.

“Not least because we have a constitution that guarantees everyone’s place and contribution, and which sees every person as equal before the law.”

But he said SA had a government that was increasingly and deliberately driving wedges between South Africans, “trading in racial divisiveness and making some South Africans feel as though they don’t belong”.

“This is totally wrong. And law which excludes on the basis of race is inherently wrong.”

On Zille’s comment that there were more racist laws now than there were under apartheid, Steenhuisen said: “This is not true, and I can’t see any evidence for it.

“I have had a conversation with her directly and expressed my views on the matter.

“Helen has referred her tweet to the party structures to determine whether she has breached any rules or regulations of the party.”

Zille said yesterday she had referred the complaints against her to the FLC and would make a submission unpacking her statement.

FF Plus leader Pieter Groenewald said the party believed there should not be race-based legislation as you could not empower a previously disadvantaged group by creating a new disadvantaged group.

He was, however, unequivocal in stating that Zille’s comment on the amount of racist laws was clearly factually wrong and that there were more racist laws under apartheid.