So just like that one opinion piece by a senior minister in the stead of Tourism Minister, Lindiwe Sisulu, we are now the African National Congress (ANC) elective conference mode! In an open editorial titled: “Hi Mzansi, have we seen justice?” Lindiwe Sisulu criticizes the importance of the rule of law and the constitution in the face of the levels of poverty afflicting Africans in South Africa post-1994. In her article Sisulu questions the moral legitimacy of holding on to the importance of the rule of law by arguing that the Apartheid regime had the rule of law, and so did Nazi Germany, therefore why do we hold it a moral and ethical non-negotiable when it is abused? The merits of her argument leave much to be desired, as she forgets that the principle of the rule of law is to ensure the equality of all citizens under the law regardless of status. Moreover, placing the supremacy of the rule of law seeks to ensure a check and balance against the abuse of state power in the hands of the executive, to which she belongs. 

It is a known history that the natural check and balance of executive power, Parliament has played the role of rubberstamping decisions made by the government, this dates to the Mandela years. It became more pronounced in embarrassment under the Mbeki and Zuma years, when the role of keeping the executive accountable failed dismally in the name of “toeing” strict party lines rather than upholding Members of Parliament (MPs) constitutional oaths and affirmations. 

As a result, the courts had to play an increasingly uncomfortable role of defending the constitutional order of the republic from an executive that would rather sell the house and furniture for a quick buck! The ending result is the kind of talk levelled by the Radical Economic Transformation (RET) brigade that judgments by judges are an attack against calls for true economic transformations and that those like Zuma who are advocates for RET are being targeted unfairly by a justice system used to settle of political scores. 

Sisulu’s attack of African judges and the constitution has no bona vide substance at all, as it seeks to paint the final vanguard of our constitutional order as nothing else, but a tool used in the everlasting factional battles of the ruling party. Moreover, it seeks to present the judiciary and constitution as stumbling blocks to true economic transformation and that the current ruling class supporting President Cyril Ramaphosa is hell-bent on maintaining the status quo of African poverty. However, when one looks at the constitution it recognises the importance of economic rights and freedom, however, it is not the constitution that must give expression to these freedoms but both the executive and legislative wings of states on all three levels of government are charged with making this expression a reality.

So rather than questioning the role of the constitution in ending poverty, Sisulu should have asked, how well has the ANC government since 1994 managed to deliver economic rights laid out in the constitution. There is no doubt that her op-ed is a failed disguise of a political campaign to be crowned the RET’s candidate leading up to the December elective conference. The fact is that Sisulu, an MP since 1994, member of the executive since 1994, and a member of the ANC’s national executive committee (NEC) has been at the centre of state power and has enough time not only to raise her concerns but to be part of the solution. With close to 30 years of democratic rule, we can now clearly see that the failures of the ANC have aided and abetted the crime of poverty as produced by colonisation and Apartheid. Sisulu cannot excuse her role in her party’s failure to meet the times. She like her comrades have been part of the problem (even by simply denying their agency)!

I put it to you that the ANC’s factional battles have reached new heights where no institution is saved from the proxy battles of power. What makes it worse is that this will not be an ordinary elective conference, Ramaphosa’s position is the most fragile of an ANC president seeking a second term since the unbanning of the ANC in 1990. Not only was his victory in NASREC a close one, but his predecessor has also continued to undermine his presidency since leaving office. Moreover, he enters this fight for his political future with an ANC battered and bruised by a local government election that saw ANC dip under 50%, a possible sign of the times to come. It is this fragility that will make leaders like Sisulu more bullish in their attempts to present themselves as the heir presumptive of the Zuma faction. What we are seeing in South Africa is no different from the American experience today, particularly in the Republican party. The cult of Trump has led to the theatrics of mini-Trumps such as US Senator Ted Cruz and Florida governor Ron DeSantis all seeking to be anointed as the heirs to Trumpism. 

There is no doubt that political contestation is normal in a democracy and must be welcomed. However, what must not be welcomed, is the abuse of legitimate debates for quick political point-scoring and this is the poor taste that defines Sisulu’s op-ed. Rather than give a genuine analysis of her party’s role in giving expression to the aspirations of the masses. She sought to deny her party’s agency in the building of a new South Africa. She is claiming that the very constitution negotiated by the ANC with other parties is now the enemy. It all sounds like she is playing checkers in the chess match! Nonetheless, time will tell.