It was to be expected that the electioneering would be rough. It is the nature of the beast.
Post elections though, we expect better. It is especially so if, as it turns out, the South African electorate send the message that they want political parties to cooperate in forming a government that would lead the country for the next five years.
Unfortunately, some parties think the electorate’s mandate is to decide who should be in the ANC’s leadership structures and in government. They wrongly believe that the electoral outcomes give them the right to decide which ANC leaders must be included or excluded depending on what appears to be their personal agendas or grievances with party leaders.
Some parties have arrogantly told the ANC that they will only consider working with the party if it ditches either President Cyril Ramaphosa or his deputy, Paul Mashatile.
Both scenarios are untenable. They are unjust and the ANC would be well advised to treat them with contempt.
Any ANC leader can be removed and replaced. But such disqualification cannot and should not be by innuendo insinuating unproven and yet (if ever) to be prosecuted criminal conduct. It most certainly cannot be because its opponents say so.
The court of public opinion is a kangaroo court that went to a private school. It is nothing more than a sophisticated form of mob justice.
It is therefore curious that ANC leaders would be persecuted in the name of nobody being above the rule of law, when the persecutors are themselves acting outside the very bounds they claim to hold sacred.
It would also be a sad day if the ANC would allow for its own democratic processes to be undermined by its opponents, even in the name of a government of national unity. While compromises are the inevitable price of any negotiation, certain principles like the right of members to decide who they are led by and for those elected to accept their fellow elected leaders, must remain sacrosanct.
Lest we forget that Ramaphosa and Mashatile contested the presidency and deputy presidency of the ANC and were duly elected by the members of the party. They did not inherit the position from their ancestors or got anointed by someone with special powers.
If the ANC decides it does not want any of its leaders, it is a decision that must be taken by the same processes that elected them in the first place. The branches must pronounce themselves on the matter. Note that I say it is the branches, not the party leaders and certainly not the party’s opponents, who must enjoy the privilege of choosing who must or must not lead the ANC.
Even in chess, the idea is that if necessary, you sacrifice your pawns and not your queen in the understanding that this is part of a long-term strategy to win. If who you sacrifice is determined by the opponent, then they might as well play by themselves.
While it is true that the people of SA have spoken and given no single party the absolute majority to form a government on its own, it would be remiss to not recognise that they have also given the ANC the largest number of votes for any one party. The ANC has nearly double the number of voters the party that came second has.
This may not be what it has been in previous elections but it is not insignificant. In simple terms, there are still more South Africans who believe in the ANC’s vision for SA than there are of any other party.
The ANC must therefore not be so desperate as to forget that it is where it is because of the will of the people who chose the party knowing who its leaders are and which leaders would be returning to the various legislatures if elected.
If the ANC sacrifices its principles – democratic centralism in particular – and instead tries to curry favour with opponents simply because we recognise that we must co-govern with other parties South Africans have voted for, then the ANC would undermine by the will of its own branches and the over
six million South Africans who voted for it.
It might well close shop and become yet another NGO agitating from the sidelines.
- Shole-Mashao is a broadcaster and political commentator
THABO SHOLE-MASHAO | ANC must not allow its leadership choices be dictated upon by political foes
Compromises to co-govern are necessary but sacrificing internal processes will deal the party a death blow
Image: Antonio Muchave
It was to be expected that the electioneering would be rough. It is the nature of the beast.
Post elections though, we expect better. It is especially so if, as it turns out, the South African electorate send the message that they want political parties to cooperate in forming a government that would lead the country for the next five years.
Unfortunately, some parties think the electorate’s mandate is to decide who should be in the ANC’s leadership structures and in government. They wrongly believe that the electoral outcomes give them the right to decide which ANC leaders must be included or excluded depending on what appears to be their personal agendas or grievances with party leaders.
Some parties have arrogantly told the ANC that they will only consider working with the party if it ditches either President Cyril Ramaphosa or his deputy, Paul Mashatile.
Both scenarios are untenable. They are unjust and the ANC would be well advised to treat them with contempt.
Any ANC leader can be removed and replaced. But such disqualification cannot and should not be by innuendo insinuating unproven and yet (if ever) to be prosecuted criminal conduct. It most certainly cannot be because its opponents say so.
The court of public opinion is a kangaroo court that went to a private school. It is nothing more than a sophisticated form of mob justice.
It is therefore curious that ANC leaders would be persecuted in the name of nobody being above the rule of law, when the persecutors are themselves acting outside the very bounds they claim to hold sacred.
It would also be a sad day if the ANC would allow for its own democratic processes to be undermined by its opponents, even in the name of a government of national unity. While compromises are the inevitable price of any negotiation, certain principles like the right of members to decide who they are led by and for those elected to accept their fellow elected leaders, must remain sacrosanct.
Lest we forget that Ramaphosa and Mashatile contested the presidency and deputy presidency of the ANC and were duly elected by the members of the party. They did not inherit the position from their ancestors or got anointed by someone with special powers.
If the ANC decides it does not want any of its leaders, it is a decision that must be taken by the same processes that elected them in the first place. The branches must pronounce themselves on the matter. Note that I say it is the branches, not the party leaders and certainly not the party’s opponents, who must enjoy the privilege of choosing who must or must not lead the ANC.
Even in chess, the idea is that if necessary, you sacrifice your pawns and not your queen in the understanding that this is part of a long-term strategy to win. If who you sacrifice is determined by the opponent, then they might as well play by themselves.
While it is true that the people of SA have spoken and given no single party the absolute majority to form a government on its own, it would be remiss to not recognise that they have also given the ANC the largest number of votes for any one party. The ANC has nearly double the number of voters the party that came second has.
This may not be what it has been in previous elections but it is not insignificant. In simple terms, there are still more South Africans who believe in the ANC’s vision for SA than there are of any other party.
The ANC must therefore not be so desperate as to forget that it is where it is because of the will of the people who chose the party knowing who its leaders are and which leaders would be returning to the various legislatures if elected.
If the ANC sacrifices its principles – democratic centralism in particular – and instead tries to curry favour with opponents simply because we recognise that we must co-govern with other parties South Africans have voted for, then the ANC would undermine by the will of its own branches and the over
six million South Africans who voted for it.
It might well close shop and become yet another NGO agitating from the sidelines.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos