DISCIPLINE AN ILLUSION
Swift action has been taken against ANC MPS who voted against Jacob Zuma in the motion of no confidence. But Zuma’s allies continue to enjoy immunity from any consequences for their wrongdoing
Another ANC elective conference, another round of disciplinary processes to silence dissent. It was confirmed this week that Derek Hanekom is set to be removed from his post as chair of the party’s disciplinary committee after his vocal opposition to President Jacob Zuma.
ANC MP Makhosi Khoza has been removed from her post as chair of the portfolio committee on public service & administration due to her fiery stance on Zuma and his excesses.
The next targets include MPS Mondli Gungubele and Pravin Gordhan (formerly Ekurhuleni mayor and finance minister respectively). This comes ahead of the ANC’S elective conference at the end of the year.
Is this unusual? No — we saw the same modus operandi before and after the ANC’S previous elective conference, in Mangaung, in which Zuma’s opponents were subjected to disciplinary processes or were purged from the organisation.
Ironically, it was Hanekom who expelled former ANC Youth League president Julius Malema and suspended most of his leadership core ahead of that conference.
It was current Zuma opponent Cyril Ramaphosa’s appeals committee that upheld that sentence, and it was the ANC’S national conference at Mangaung, overseen by secretary-general Gwede Mantashe, that solidified Malema’s expulsion and disbanded the dissenting ANC Youth League and the ANC’S Limpopo provincial committee in the aftermath.
Only the ANC in Gauteng survived, simply because Mantashe and company did not have a solid case to dismantle the provincial leadership at the time — even though the Zuma faction had tried to do so.
While it is convenient to see Hanekom as a victim this time around, he was at the helm of the disciplinary committee when Malema was expelled and he played a role in Zuma’s scorched-earth policy at the time.
Still, the Zuma faction’s victory in acting against Hanekom and Khoza shows that this group is very much in charge in the structures governing the day-to-day running of the organisation — the national working committee (NWC) and the national executive committee (NEC).
Despite the hype from Mantashe giving Hanekom 10 days to explain why he should not be removed as ANC disciplinary committee chairman, it is not up to him to decide who sits on the committee.
It is an NEC decision. Mantashe’s letter and the response to it is likely to provide a defence or comeback for Hanekom when the NEC, which decides his fate, meets at the end of September.
Khoza was removed as chair of the parliamentary committee on public service & administration on Mantashe’s instruction.
This took place after four ANC MPS boycotted a parliamentary committee hearing in which minister Faith Muthambi was set to answer allegations of nepotism.
The four MPS are set to face disciplinary processes, instituted by the caucus itself, for failing to pitch up at the hearing.
But ANC disciplinary processes have become farcical. They are largely motivated by factional interests and are inconsistent by design.
After deputy minister of higher education Mduduzi Manana resigned last week for allegedly beating up a woman at a Johannesburg nightclub, ANC ally Cosatu noted that many other errant ministers continue to occupy cabinet posts.
“We would like to see ministers like Mosebenzi Zwane, Faith Muthambi and Bathabile Dlamini also being held accountable for their failures,” Cosatu said.
“The president himself needs to step down and such a decision will be very helpful to the country and its economy.”
Cosatu insiders say it is time for the ANC to recognise that those in Zuma’s “good books” continued to enjoy immunity from any consequences for their wrongdoing.
The disciplinary process against
Hanekom and others is expected to be drawn out and ultimately will be decided by the faction that emerges on top at the yearend national conference.
Arguments that could complicate the case against Zuma dissenters are the many attacks, from his allies, on those who disagree with him.
For instance, the ANC Youth League shockingly described NEC member Gordhan as an “askari” or turncoat who sided with the apartheid government against their own comrades during the struggle.
This kind of attack, which has so far drawn no action against the Youth League, could be used to argue that the ANC’S disciplinary process is being applied selectively.
“The dominant force in the NWC is obviously a pro-zuma force,” say sources, commenting on the committee’s decision to discipline MPS who opened up on how they voted in the no-confidence motion two weeks ago.
The processes against Hanekom and Khoza are set to be lengthy and complicated, requiring carefully constructed and considered charge sheets if they are to hold water.
Another difficult choice will be who will hear the charges. The NEC will have to decide and agree on new members to replace Hanekom on the disciplinary committee and Gordhan on the appeals committee.
If the charges proceed, those accused will be given time to prepare for the case. This will take the process dangerously close to the December conference and, even if they are found guilty, the members will have a right to appeal and also to attend the national conference.
In the run-up to the conference it seems that discipline, to the ANC, is as much of an illusion as are accountability, transparency and fairness.