Former President Thabo Mbeki and President Jacob Zuma at the tension-filled 2007 ANC Polokwane conference. Picture: Cedric MboyisaSome thought it would never happen. Perhaps it is one of the most remarkable political comebacks that the country has ever seen.
Rewind to June 2005, it seemed near impossible that one Jacob Zuma would be President one day. Here is the man dismissed as the country’s Deputy President after Judge Hilary Squires convicted his former financial advisor Schabir Shaik of fraud. The two were found to have had a relationship which could be summed up as being a “mutually beneficial symbiosis”. To this day it remains a mystery why Zuma was never charged with Shaik. One wonders whether this was merely a mistake on the part of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), or whether it was a ploy to keep Zuma out of the dock while subjecting him to a court of public opinion. We all know that the NPA (through former boss Bulelani Ngcuka, he of tapegate) had earlier professed to have a prima facie case against Zuma. In law, if you have a prima facie case the next step is to prosecute, without fear or favour if I may add. Yet in its weird wisdom the NPA chose to charge Zuma with corruption, relating to the controversial multi-billion rand arms deal, after the conviction of Shaik.
The man from Nkandla seemed to be well on his way out. His rape trial seemed to be a final nail in his political coffin. Only a handful of the high-profile ANC figures chose to been seen publicly supporting him. Many opted to avoid him like a plague, because at the time former president Thabo Mbeki had considerable power and influence as the leader of the ruling party. It was an open secret that the two comrades had become foes. Zuma’s corruption trial and rape acquittal provided him and his supporters with ammunition to stage a spectacular comeback which would in two years result in an embarrassing dethroning of Mbeki. The gloves were off; it was Mbeki the intellectual versus Zuma the uneducated strategist.
Then Polokwane happened. We are where we are today because of the December 2007 ANC conference. The ANC delegates from nine provinces made it unambiguously clear that Zuma would become the head of state, irrespective of his on-and-off corruption trial. With Mbeki out of the way, the Zumates went about consolidating power in the ruling party.
No doubt, the big target of the Zuma ANC cleansing project was Mbeki. The opportunity to get rid of Mbeki duly presented itself when Judge Chris Nicholson inferred that Robert Mugabe’s ally had had a hand in the criminal prosecution of his nemesis, Zuma. The ANC national executive committee wasted no time in “recalling” Mbeki just a few months shy of his second presidential five-year term. Although the Supreme Court of Appeal rubbished Nicholson’s judgment, it later emerged that indeed known Mbekites (in the form of Ngcuka and former Scorpions boss Leonard McCarthy) had actually manipulated and abused legal process to victimise Zuma and undermine his presidential ambitions.
We will never know whether Zuma is corrupt or not. This is all thanks to some rogue elements in the NPA who made it impossible, although this is debatable, to prosecute Zuma due to the irreparably tainted nature of his discontinued prosecution. Even if the NPA had opted to continue its prosecution of Zuma, in all likelihood the damning spy tapes would have got him off the hook through a permanent stay of prosecution application. What we have now is a President who is neither guilty nor innocent.
So now it is up to Zuma to prove that he is a true leadership material, despite his many flaws. Whether we like it or not, we have to accept and respect the outcome of a democratic process. The electorate put Zuma in power in an emphatic fashion. But can he deliver? Is he really a champion of the poor he purports to be? Will he tirelessly fight corruption as he has promised? Is he good for SA?
Rewind to June 2005, it seemed near impossible that one Jacob Zuma would be President one day. Here is the man dismissed as the country’s Deputy President after Judge Hilary Squires convicted his former financial advisor Schabir Shaik of fraud. The two were found to have had a relationship which could be summed up as being a “mutually beneficial symbiosis”. To this day it remains a mystery why Zuma was never charged with Shaik. One wonders whether this was merely a mistake on the part of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), or whether it was a ploy to keep Zuma out of the dock while subjecting him to a court of public opinion. We all know that the NPA (through former boss Bulelani Ngcuka, he of tapegate) had earlier professed to have a prima facie case against Zuma. In law, if you have a prima facie case the next step is to prosecute, without fear or favour if I may add. Yet in its weird wisdom the NPA chose to charge Zuma with corruption, relating to the controversial multi-billion rand arms deal, after the conviction of Shaik.
The man from Nkandla seemed to be well on his way out. His rape trial seemed to be a final nail in his political coffin. Only a handful of the high-profile ANC figures chose to been seen publicly supporting him. Many opted to avoid him like a plague, because at the time former president Thabo Mbeki had considerable power and influence as the leader of the ruling party. It was an open secret that the two comrades had become foes. Zuma’s corruption trial and rape acquittal provided him and his supporters with ammunition to stage a spectacular comeback which would in two years result in an embarrassing dethroning of Mbeki. The gloves were off; it was Mbeki the intellectual versus Zuma the uneducated strategist.
Then Polokwane happened. We are where we are today because of the December 2007 ANC conference. The ANC delegates from nine provinces made it unambiguously clear that Zuma would become the head of state, irrespective of his on-and-off corruption trial. With Mbeki out of the way, the Zumates went about consolidating power in the ruling party.
No doubt, the big target of the Zuma ANC cleansing project was Mbeki. The opportunity to get rid of Mbeki duly presented itself when Judge Chris Nicholson inferred that Robert Mugabe’s ally had had a hand in the criminal prosecution of his nemesis, Zuma. The ANC national executive committee wasted no time in “recalling” Mbeki just a few months shy of his second presidential five-year term. Although the Supreme Court of Appeal rubbished Nicholson’s judgment, it later emerged that indeed known Mbekites (in the form of Ngcuka and former Scorpions boss Leonard McCarthy) had actually manipulated and abused legal process to victimise Zuma and undermine his presidential ambitions.
We will never know whether Zuma is corrupt or not. This is all thanks to some rogue elements in the NPA who made it impossible, although this is debatable, to prosecute Zuma due to the irreparably tainted nature of his discontinued prosecution. Even if the NPA had opted to continue its prosecution of Zuma, in all likelihood the damning spy tapes would have got him off the hook through a permanent stay of prosecution application. What we have now is a President who is neither guilty nor innocent.
So now it is up to Zuma to prove that he is a true leadership material, despite his many flaws. Whether we like it or not, we have to accept and respect the outcome of a democratic process. The electorate put Zuma in power in an emphatic fashion. But can he deliver? Is he really a champion of the poor he purports to be? Will he tirelessly fight corruption as he has promised? Is he good for SA?
ya basically we are stuck with him for the next 5 years whether we like it or not. so we can olny hope for the best and all try to work together to make this country the best that it can be!
ReplyDeleteZuma's like the Terminator. just when you think he's gone, HE'LL BE BACK.
ReplyDeleteSecond attempt:
ReplyDeleteBru, I think this blog has a lot of potential. There is definitely a need in SA for good, strong, free political commentry. If the SABC won't air it, we'll take to the blogs! Viva! But you should try keep the posts shorter and put in a few pics to draw the eye in and break up the copy. Also, you need to take hard lines and be controversial, so that there is a difference between the blog and the Op-Eds in the paper.
Interesting, Cedric.
ReplyDeleteThis raises an issue that I’ve been pondering myself.A few days ago Don Mkhwanazi of the Friends of JZ Trust noted that after Zuma’s dismissal so many politicians said very bad things about him(JZ) that some were shocked when he included them in his cabinet.My take on it is that the McCarthy tapes really sealed the Zuma Presidency.Even before the tapes my view was that a political solution would avert violence and bloodshed in South Africa but that bridge has been crossed thankfully.The Zuma Presidency has come with some of the greatest peace South Africa has known in a while.KwaZulu-Natal’s problem spots seem very quiet right largely due to the solidarity behind him.Very few would argue against that he has been the right man at the right time despite the ethical questions.We are also seeing another meteoric rise of someone who was the accused in John Hlophe.The vicious approach of certain sections of the media and politicians,academics has backfired and turned him into a victim rather than villain that they intended and he may be in the office of the Chief Justice before we know it.Interesting months ahead
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing how one is interested in politics, not because I liked it but the influance I got from reading the works of people like Cedric Mboyisa the Honorable Political Editor of The Citizen.
ReplyDelete