Weekend Argus (Saturday Edition)
Some historical lessons
NO ONE can credibly take issue with President Cyril Ramaphosa’s opening statement before the State Capture hearings that corruption is not a new phenomenon in South Africa and that the apartheid system was “morally and systemically corrupt”.
Nor, we can all agree with Ramaphosa, is corruption unique to the ANC.
But then Ramaphosa launches into what is likely to be the leitmotif of his testimony. The crux of his defence of the ANC – for this week he appeared before the commission as party leader, not the nation’s president – is that it was a momentary aberration.
The party recognises, Ramaphosa reassures us, some in the ANC were “advertently and inadvertently complicit in corrupt actions”. But this did not mean “the ANC is itself corrupt or uniquely affected by corruption”. What rubbish.
If the testimony to the Zondo Commission shows anything, so far, it is that the ANC is corrupt to its very core. Almost every facet of its organisation, from the deployment of cadres to the studious indifference to best managerial practice, is structured to enable looting.
While it is true that the National Party placed its Broederbond drones, in the top positions of most SOEs, it differed from the ANC in its goals. The Nats’ primary objective was not to loot but to have SOEs that delivered substantial developmental advantages to South Africa. In this, they succeeded.
Much of Ramaphosa’s testimony was the relentless exoneration of himself, his ministers and his party. Yes, sometimes bad things happened, but no one’s to blame. As Ramaphosa earnestly explained, cadre deployment was an admirable tool of government that conceivably, when carelessly applied, might cause a nick or two in the user. On occasion, “ill-qualified persons were put into positions”.
There are some uncomfortable historical lessons. The Nat cadres deployed to SOEs appear to have been less venal, and more disciplined and capable, than their latter-day ANC counterparts.
Also, the Nat party leadership, when it came to public revelations of corruption, were more readily shamed.
There is a critical difference that will save Ramaphosa from a similar fate to that of Vorster. Any ANC successor would be a thousandfold worse than him. For now, as a result of the Jacob Zuma inoculation, Ramaphosa has immunity.