Jacob Zuma is a natural born political survivor. On Tuesday South Africa’s president <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/08/jacob-zuma-survives-no-confidence-vote-south-african-president" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">overcame</a> an eighth no confidence vote, despite the mountain of evidence of corrupt conduct that has emerged in recent months.
But it may prove to be a Pyrrhic victory – for him and most certainly for his party, the African National Congress (ANC). <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2017-08-08-zuma-supporters-celebrate-his-win-outa-considers-legal-action/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">“Hollow”</a> was the word that one opposition leader, Bantu Holomisa, used afterwards, while the Economic Freedom Fighter’s leader Julius Malema employed a well-known Africa proverb: “When you want to eat an elephant you do it bit by bit”.
Zuma’s political death is proving to be a protracted affair. There was an air of expectation on Tuesday that recent allegations of “state capture” – attested to by a welter of evidence from the so-called <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/2017/06/01/the-new-gupta-emails-are-a-lot-heres-what-they-say-in-5-quick_a_22120706/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#guptaleaks</a> – would be enough to persuade a sufficient number of the members of the ruling ANC to support an opposition-sponsored no confidence vote.
In the event, after a fractious two-hour debate scarred by ugly banter across the floor of the National Assembly, the motion fell short of the 201 votes required to remove Zuma and his cabinet. But yesterday was remarkably different. On the previous seven occasions that the opposition have tabled no confidence votes since Zuma’s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president. Yesterday’s vote was a watershed for the liberation movement that brought an end to apartheid in 1994: around 30 of the 223 ANC MPs who voted yesterday sided with the opposition.
As the ANC’s chief whip, Jackson Mthembu, ruefully observed afterwards, this is true pause for reflection for the ruling party. Never before has such a significant number of the parliamentary caucus rebelled and defied the party whip.
Zuma’s streetwise political skills are well-known. So too is his adeptness at using executive patronage to secure the loyalty of party members as has been made clear in the revelations <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-22513410" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">arising from his links to the Gupta family</a>.
<h2>The secret ballot saga</h2>
But the back story to the unprecedented rebellion within his own party was the method of voting as much as Zuma’s political skullduggery. For the first time, parliament was compelled to allow MPs <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2017-08-07-mbete-allows-secret-ballot/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">to vote in secret</a>. This followed a <a href="http://www.702.co.za/articles/251722/bantu-holomisa-explains-parly-rules-on-secret-ballot" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">legal challenge</a> to the rules by Holomisa’s United Democratic Movement.
In its 22 June <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2017-06-22-read-in-full-concourt-ruling-on-secret-ballot/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">judgment</a>, the Constitutional Court – an institutional beacon of excellence and integrity in the context of the “capture” of other state bodies – had held that the speaker of the National Assembly had the discretion to order a secret ballot in exceptional circumstances.
Since the ruling, a number of ANC MPs have gone public with testimony of intimidation and even <a href="http://ewn.co.za/2017/07/12/makhosi-khoza-s-daughter-receives-death-threats" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">death threats</a> in the case of Makhosi Khoza. In turn, the ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma’s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go. The intervention served to underline the need to depart from the generally established principle of open voting.
Accordingly, speaker Baleka Mbete had little legal choice but to opt for a secret ballot, even though it would encourage dissenting voices among the ranks of the ANC caucus. Politically, she had probably done the political mathematics and, as the national chairperson of the ANC, was confident that regardless of the shield that she said was necessary to protect ANC MPs so that they could vote with their conscience, the numbers would still work out in Zuma’s favour.
And so it proved: 177 MPs voted for the motion, and 198 against (with 9 abstentions). Since the opposition has 151 MPs, at least three of whom were absent through illness, it means that that at least 29 and possibly as many as 35 ANC MPs jumped ship.
<h2>Win-win for the opposition</h2>
But it was a win-win situation for the opposition. Afterwards, in the unseasonably balmy winter’s evening outside the parliament in Cape Town, one after another of the leaders of the opposition spoke cheerfully about the political future and of the health of South Africa’s democracy.
They may have lost the battle, but they feel confident that they will win the war. After all, it is clear that Zuma is now their greatest electoral asset, with <a href="http://www.biznews.com/leadership/2017/05/31/ipsos-poll-zuma-unpopular/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">several polls </a>(including the respected <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2016-05-19-afrobarometer-trio-of-polls-show-shifting-attitudes-but-voters-would-still-opt-for-anc/#.WYo8na17Gi4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Afrobarometer</a>), showing that across race and class, trust in Zuma has collapsed since he was returned to power for a second term in 2014.
Last year, the ANC suffered its first major electoral setbacks since the advent of democracy in 1994 when it <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolt-of-south-africas-metropoles-a-revolution-of-rising-expectations-64617" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lost control</a> of three major city governments in Pretoria, Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth. Now, its political management skills appear to be in disarray as factionalism and deep, painful divisions dominate internal party politics. This is all unfolding in the run-up to what is likely to be a bloody five-yearly <a href="http://www.anc.org.za/content/venue-anc-54th-national-conference" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">national elective conference</a> in December, at which the ANC will elect a new President of the party to succeed Zuma.
That may or may not mark the start of a new era of renewal for the ANC. But Zuma’s term as President of the country is only due to end in 2019. A lot more damage could be done to the country’s economy and its prospects for growth.
The consequence of that, however, is that the ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority at the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela’s historic victory in 1994.
Yesterday may have been a victory for Zuma. But in the longer term it is likely to come to be seen as a major defeat for the ANC. &#8211; Written by <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-calland-182127" target="_blank" rel="author noopener noreferrer">Richard Calland</a>, Associate Professor in Public Law, University of Cape Town
Originally published in <a href="https://theconversation.com/africa" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Conversation</a>
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82244/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />

No confidence vote: a victory for Zuma, but a defeat for the ANC

<h4>What the judges said</h4>
&#8220;We feel Thuli Mandonsela is a woman of substance who has inspired many people across Africa with her stand for the rule of law and against corruption. In seven years of hard work, she has spoken truth to power and helped keep the people running her country accountable. A difficult job she carried out with professionalism and integrity.&#8221;
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-full wp-image-28699 aligncenter" src="http://www.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_5398.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="683" srcset="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_5398.jpg 1024w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_5398-300x200.jpg 300w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_5398-600x400.jpg 600w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_5398-768x512.jpg 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />
Her polite, welcoming, voice would make anyone feel at home. It is strange to see Thuli Madonsela – the towering advocate woman who has taken flak from politicians for years – at home, relaxed and flanked by her family. She ushers me into the lounge. We sit next to an open patio door, facing a cluster of colorful trees, with a welcome breeze easing this sweltering summer’s day. Every bit of furniture matches her unpretentious nature. African paintings on the walls; each ornament holds a story about her travels across the continent.
She looks good for a person who has just left office, in her own words, followed by missiles. Her biggest case so far has caused ructions – the so-called state capture report. She was investigating allegations made by South Africa’s Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas that he was a offered the job of Finance Minister by the billionaire Gupta family that has opened a can of worms.
The offer came, it is alleged, just before President Jacob Zuma fired the then Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene in December 2015. When Jonas blew the whistle, former member of parliament Vytjie Mentor also alleged she was offered a cabinet post by brothers Ajay, Atul and Rajesh Gupta. The family has businesses, from coal mines to media companies, and were in partnership with President Zuma’s son. Former Government Communications and Information Systems head Themba Maseko also claimed the family unsuccessfully tried to bully him to put government advertising to their newspaper.
This report was one of the last acts in Madonsela’s seven turbulent years of speaking truth to power that took nerves of steel.
Her office, in the last days, was like a house of madness, she says. There were complaints to be investigated, last-minute interviews and many loose ends from multiple investigations.
On the very last day, she and her team worked through the night in an atmosphere leavened by banter and jokes.
“It was exhilarating, as a result I never really had the opportunity to feel sad about seeing my office for the last time because there was so much adrenaline, so much to be done and it was all done,” she says.
“Then there were curve balls of having being either sued or spending time with the lawyers. On the outside I was pretty calm but on the inside I would be thinking I have three hours to complete this document but these other things were coming, so I did feel some of the pressure. There was a bit of noise on the outside but the team that I worked closely with also stayed calm. I think the only time I saw some cracks was when we were told the president has lodged an application for an interdict and they thought it was the end of the road. I had anticipated these difficulties with some of the seniors, so when the younger ones got panicky about life overtaking the good work done, we didn’t panic. We told them to calm down and continue with the report as if they haven’t heard any news.”
Zuma had applied for a court interdict to stop the report’s release, saying he wasn’t given enough chance to respond. He also accused Madonsela of saying the report was not final, implying he was misled. Zuma withdrew the court challenge on the day of the hearing.
“I’ve never said it was not a final report. All in writing, I have always promised to issue two reports. Phase one would cover whatever we knew then and what should be done to fix it. It was going to look at ministerial appointments, Mentor and Jonas’ allegations. It would look at the president’s liability because of the 30-day requirement. Phase two would be on the Catholic Bishop’s request to look into Gupta-related companies and all licenses and related matter,” explains Madonsela
Madonsela’s report has left a trail of tears and paper leading to murky business dealings that the Gupta family denies.
“I recommended a commission of enquiry because this investigation cuts across ministries, the legislator, the executive and go into state-owned enterprises, it is bigger than the arms deal (South Africa’s arms procurement scandal) and if you’re going to do an investigation like that you obviously need a commission of enquiry.”
Madonsela says she doesn’t understand why the report was being challenged and also “got a sense that if the president wanted this matter to be investigated he would have long done so.”
“This gives a perception that is not in his favor because if somebody makes this allegation about his son and this person is a member of the cabinet, a normal person who has nothing to hide would look into it. That’s a question that people raise which shouldn’t be raised about the president,” she adds.
“We asked him a simple question like why did you fire Mr Nene?”
The president chose not to answer the question, Madonsela says.
Madonsela knows how it feels to field questions about a son. Her son Mbusowabantu took her official car while she was asleep, in 2012, and had an accident.
“It was very awkward because for me, I’ve been asked very difficult questions too, I couldn’t give a different answer to journalist. The issue about my son, I have given a consistent answer whether you’re the media or parliament. I was asked by parliament and I never even got a lawyer to answer those questions, so I don’t understand.”
It’s surprising that this woman, who has worked where few dare to tread, has regrets. She feels she should have encouraged someone to sue the government for depriving her office of resources. Organs of state are compelled by section 181 of the constitution to equip institutions like hers. Madonsela’s office didn’t have electronic data capturing.
“You have to go through the whole system manually to find out where that matter is. You’re also unable spot cases that aren’t moving. I think we should have stood up, it is threatening the functionality of that office,” bemoans Madonsela.
Her biggest regret, she says, was also leaving remuneration problems to the administration. Staff were unhappy with a heavy work and light salaries. Law firms handle four major cases a year while Mandonsela’s staff handled more than 50.
Madonsela says this means low morale, contrary to her successor Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s claim, before Parliament, that hinted at Madonsela’s management style.
“I wrote in the report that staff morale was a problem. I had explained that the main problem with staff morale was finances. People are getting too many cases and it is documented, there are memos at my desk all the time,” Madonsela explains.
“In other words, had it been me I would have explained to them, provided I have evidence. I would have said here is a memo, the provincial managers have taken us to court on some of those issues. She had to say she will improve staff morale. She can’t improve staff morale without being given money.”
Parliament invited Madonsela for her last appearance, on October 12, but this was postponed to October 19. This meant Mkhwebane would sit in parliament to present the 2015/16 Annual Report after a mere six days in office.
“I remember I was with the team when we got the notice. We laughed and said nothing here is surprising. We still wanted to find out why it was postponed, but no answer was given. For me it was about leaving graciously but I think it created a clumsy transition between me and my successor. She now had to find herself presenting a report that was not hers which required prior preparation for her to defend herself.”
She also feels there should have been more quiet conversations with the government around values and processes. Institutions with more or less similar functions of the public protector spend their time doing a lot of education, she says, to the executive around the laws they have passed. Her clashes with government ended up being about processes and powers, but at the core of the disputes was the enforcement of values.
“There’s a common narrative about wrong and right. Take Nkandla [the president’s homestead that received irregular non-security upgrades], it was always about what was the ethical standard that President Zuma should have complied with. What was the responsibility of the president?”
“We’re back to the same problem again with state capture. The essence of it was what was the responsibility of the president of this country when one of his own trusted deputy ministers says I’ve been offered a bribe to take the job of my colleague and pass decisions that favor the person that is offering me a bribe. If you’re a president of the country isn’t it your job to just find out if there this is happening since the person who is saying this is implicating your friend and your child or somebody you call a friend publicly,” says Madonsela.
“It’s just an issue about ethics. Themba Maseko accuses you publicly as the president of the country that you asked him to help those people, don’t say I never did that. Shouldn’t you say I have instituted a commission of enquiry to find out why this young fellow is lying about me.”
“These people may well be lying and if they are lying they should be called to order but you need a process that checks out whether or not they telling the truth. As long as nothing is done about it you will always have this question mark. It is creating a dysfunctional executive, it’s creating fractured relationships but it’s also saying to the world there are improper influences in the state of South Africa but it may well be not true.”
These are conversations she believes would have helped cabinet with its responsibilities as stipulated in the Executive Members Ethic Act under section 195 and 237 of the constitution. Her office was inundated with requests to investigate cases she would rather not, like state capture. There were many reasons. Hands were full, she was on her way out, cases should be dealt with on last in last out basis but this case was brought under the Executive Members Ethics Act. When a case is brought in through this Act it compels the Public Protector to investigate. According to this law, cases are also supposed to be completed in 30 days, which also left her with no time.
Madonsela had to make tough choices in standing up for the truth that won her the admiration of many Africans and won her the title of FORBES AFRICA’s 2016 Person of the Year – a fitting send off for a fearless woman who never backed down even in the face of death threats.
“My children are relieved. My brother is just relieved that I made it out alive. That was his message the day I finished on the 14th, saying “sisi siyabonga ukuthi labantu abaku bulalanga (Sister, we are grateful these people didn’t kill you). I hope we keep it that way because with the state capture report, the missiles are following me. I’m done, this is just revenge, I can’t harm them in any way whatsoever,” she laughs.
Many people want to hear from this elegant and softly-spoken daughter of a domestic worker and taxi driver; she has filled her diary until the end of the year. Thereafter she heads off for either Harvard, where she may study guidance and governance, or lecturing at Oxford University. It’ll be a lot quieter there.
&nbsp;

Tag: Gupta’s

FORBES AFRICA SOCIAL MEDIA

No confidence vote: a victory for Zuma, but a defeat for the ANC

‘Sister, We Are Grateful These People Didn’t Kill You’