Ramaphosa must clean up the ANC’S leadership

THE union of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s “new dawn”, a promise of renaissance and prosperity, with an inherently venal and inept ruling party secretary-general, as a rational mechanism to placate us, is insufferable and unsustainable. If this was to be tolerated, reason would inevitably contradict itself.

Let me explain. A great deal of apprehension arose when it emerged Jacob Zuma had attended the ANC national executive committee (NEC) meeting in Cape Town last week.

Although the ANC constitution doesn’t provide for this, Zuma presumably attended as an “ex-officio member” owing to his position as a former president. A lot had happened in the week leading to the three-day meeting.

Firstly, Ramaphosa made crucial amendments to the terms of reference of the judicial commission of inquiry into state capture in which Zuma is implicated. These amendments pertained to the admissibility of evidence put before the commission.

Secondly, while affirming the state’s long-standing undertaking to foot Zuma’s legal bills for his trial on charges of racketeering, corruption, money laundering and fraud, Ramaphosa was accused of “supposedly inviting” court challenges on this arrangement.

One can appreciate the objections and cynicism with which this seemingly irrational arrangement has been met. Zuma allegedly committed these crimes in his private capacity, not while discharging his duties as a state functionary.

Just as the NEC meeting was on its last stretch, social media went into overdrive as fake reports emerged, claiming the NEC had resolved to pledge its support for Zuma during his trial.

Media commentary and speculation on the purported influence Zuma still commands in the NEC intensified as Ramaphosa’s leadership philosophy and resolve were, again, left hanging in the air.

Calm prevailed only after ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule affirmed the NEC’S impartiality with respect to Zuma’s legal woes.

In the end, this is what counted. Incredulously, the NEC also asserted individual members’ “right to express their sympathy and solidarity with anyone affected” by law enforcement agencies and judicial processes, provided such support was not rendered under the purported aegis of the ANC.

This is also significant. The ineluctable consequences of this pronouncement has led to individuals “who described themselves as representatives of business forums within and outside Kwazulu-natal” to agitate public support for Zuma when he appears in court.

If history bears invoking, the ANC will not throw the book at any member who violates the above injunction.

This is even more so, given the character of the ANC’S chief administrative officer, Magashule. A critical examination of Magashule’s conduct in his curent position should invite considerable apprehension for Ramaphosa and the ANC.

Firstly, Magashule, while in KZN, immediately after the ANC conference, openly challenged Ramaphosa’s legitimacy and called for members of the ANC to work towards unseating Ramaphosa in five years.

Secondly, when it became clear that Zuma’s days as president were numbered, Magashule was strangely welcoming to Black First Land First overtures beseeching the ANC to keep its “hands off” Zuma.

As we all know, Magashule is implicated in a litany of malfeasance in the Free State, where he served as premier. This raises two important, but separate dilemmas with respect to lingering perceptions of Ramaphosa’s leadership.

The first concerns the essence of Ramaphosa’s apparent leadership philosophy. The second relates to what accounts for the dilemma of the quasicanonisation of Ramaphosa in the mainstream media in the context of the vagaries of the political leadership collective within which he operates.

His leadership philosophy seems to be influenced by Nelson Mandela’s. Notwithstanding, the prevailing socio-political circumstances couldn’t be more dissimilar.

Unlike Ramaphosa, Mandela presided over a relatively unified ANC. Also, the political hegemony the ANC enjoyed then has all but wilted. Mandela wove a canvas on which our nationhood was meant to be etched. Sadly, South Africans remain, arguably, as racially divided today as they were then. What compounds Ramaphosa’s conundrum is the perverse class divisions, including growing wealth and income inequalities.

In as much as Mandela inherited a then broken economy, today’s broken economy, government and society can largely be attributed to the ANC. It is for this reason that the ANC was punished the last time it tested electoral support for it.

This week’s release of its conference resolution signalled the ANC’S commitment to redeem itself. However, the ANC can’t successfully renew itself with venal leaders infesting its top leadership echelons.

The ANC’S continued tolerance of the patently venal and errant Magashule could materially blight Ramaphosa’s vision and the ANC’S electoral success.

It is imperative that the ANC, through its integrity committee, not only act, but is also seen to act boldly, against its incorrigibly wayward secretary-general.

Ramaphosa must set in a clear light his leadership philosophy, resolve and consistency – which constitute his greatest merits.

Khaas is chairman of Corporate SA, a strategic consulting firm, and trustee of the Institute for the Advancement of Public Interest. Follow him via Twitter @ tebogokhaas