Lately, the leadership has taken a direct and unadulterated departure from the Freedom Charter by calling for a political solution in the matter of the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions vs the President of the ANC. What happened to ‘There shall be equality before the law?’. Or are we now to have political solutions to every citizen’s criminal case?
(v) Blatant threats to kill for certain individuals if desires other than their own are not satisfied are made with impunity. When democracy-supporting institutions intervene to stop such delinquent behaviour, more of our leaders come out in loud support for threats to kill.
The lists of these excesses and the arrogance that accompanies them grows by the day. What resistance is put up by some in the ranks of members and leaders is harshly suppressed into tame acquiescence.
This state of affairs leaves me and many other comrades, no doubt, with a clear sense that our membership to the organisation is an endorsement of practices that are dangerous to the democracy that many people in our country struggled to bring into being.
I appeal to you to reply to my concerns in an open and frank manner so that everyone can be assured that the deduction that I and many other comrades have made, that the organisation is no longer pursuing the original policies of the ANC, is correct.
Yours sincerely,
Mosiuoa Lekota
Open letter to comrade Terror Lekota 3 October 2008, published on www.politicsweb.co.za
I have been mandated by the Secretary General, on behalf of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the ANC, to respond to your open letter to us.
First and foremost it is with great sadness that those entrusted with the leadership of our movement and country should find it normal to communicate with their organisation through the media. This is even more strange coming from one who is the former chairperson and, therefore, well averse with the policies and traditions of our movement.
The answer to the apparent puzzle seems to be contained in the second but last paragraph of your letter. For purposes of clarity, I wish to quote: ‘This state of affairs leaves me and many other comrades, no doubt, with a clear sense that our membership to the organisation is an endorsement of practices that are dangerous to the democracy that many people in our country struggled to bring into being.’
Put bluntly, you and those who share your views are giving notice to leave the ANC. For the record, the ANC is a voluntary association of individuals who believe in it, and who are free to leave as and when they seek to do so.
History is full of examples of such individuals. In the majority of cases, these were leaders who had grown too big for the ANC. These people could no longer subject themselves to the discipline of the organisation. As such, they either had to leave voluntarily or be expelled. We hope we have not reached that stage in your case.
I now wish to respond to some of the allegations in your letter. May I take this opportunity to remind you of the many comrades you refused permission to speak in the NEC, abusing your position as chair, simply because you disagreed with them. In so far as conducting meetings, the NEC was reduced to an animal farm, where those who shared your views had a field day whilst the rest were banished to the twilight. The unlucky ones were subject to your verbal assaults, privately and publicly.
Again, in case you have forgotten, you presided over a disrespectful discourse, which insulted comrade Nelson Mandela in the NEC you were chairing. In this regard, we challenge you to deny the fact that you did so.
Your individual and sectoral interests prevailed upon you to officiate over such an unwarranted attack upon an old man who thought of you as his own son.
As brotherly advice, we suggest you visit Madiba and apologise.
Your behaviour and public utterances prior to the Polokwane conference were, to say the least, un-ANC.
Judge Nicholson found in the case of the State vs J Zuma that the executive violated the constitutional rights of the ANC president. We hope that all of us will respect all institutions that serve our country without fear or favour.
To you and all your cronies, we at the ANC say that what you are trying to demonstrate to the country is nothing but the last kicks of a dying horse.
Remember that the ANC, as an institution, will stay forever while individuals like yourselves will go.
I wish to assure members of the ANC and the country at large that the ANC has not deviated from policies it has adopted at various conferences, some of which you presided over as our national chairperson. We are looking forward to engagement within our structures in line with the traditions of the ANC.
Jeff Radebe, NEC Member
1 First contact
In October 2008 I was in a steady job with a local investment bank in Johannesburg. My days comprised of meetings, emails and PowerPoint presentations. I’d wake up at 6.30am, tolerate half an hour of traffic, a day of office work, and some exercise in the afternoon if I was lucky enough to escape before dark. I shaved, wore suits, owned a Blackberry and had some cash to spend. I worked hard, impressed my clients, and got along well with my colleagues. The routine was settled and easy. But something was amiss.
Problem was I didn’t really know what I wanted. I got increasingly interested in politics, but didn’t consider it as a career. Despite suspecting that I would enjoy being politically active, I was not inspired to get involved, even on an informal basis. From a distance, the ANC seemed to be reserved for comrades only, while the DA appeared to be made up of a bunch of ex-high school debating team captains. Hence, when the prospect of a political realignment surfaced, it both intrigued and excited me.
During my time as a banker I had become a regular attendee of Wits University’s Public Conversations, which were colourfully chaired by the charismatic academic and political commentator Xolela Mangcu. I enjoyed these forums, partly because of the fascinating topics discussed and partly because the discussions satisfied my desire to be more politically active. One day in late October, after Mosiuoa Lekota wrote his open letter to the ANC Secretary General, and when the formation of a breakaway movement from the ANC seemed a certainty, Mbhazima Shilowa was invited to address the forum. I made sure not to miss it.
I arrived a little late and was further delayed by the tight security. What for? I wondered. The lecture hall was packed and I was forced to take up a front row seat. Though I did not realise it at the time, I happened to be sitting next to Wendy Luhabe, the Chancellor of the University of Johannesburg and Shilowa’s wife. I was there to see Shilowa, despite not even knowing what he looked like! Yet, he was immediately recognisable when he entered the room. He had a sense of purpose about him, and the glow that celebrities seem to acquire from spending so much time in the spotlight.
His speech was a little guarded for my liking. He spoke about the need for a direct elective system to improve accountability. He avoided levelling direct accusations at the ruling party, apart from saying that the ANC was a voluntary organisation and that members who chose to resign should be allowed to do so without being harassed. He explored the differences between a liberation movement and a developmental state, implying that the ANC’s struggle mentality had become outdated. The issue which everyone wanted to hear more about received only fleeting attention. Almost as an afterthought, Shilowa mentioned that a new political party would certainly be formed. He went on to invite us to what he called a convention of South Africans where, he said, this topic would be explored further.
Throughout Shilowa’s address a cluster of youngsters, clearly from the ANC Youth League, attempted to disrupt the speaker. This gave rise to a rather awkward situation, especially given the modest size of the gathering (about 50 or 60 people). After each statement by Shilowa one of the main agitators would shout something that I couldn’t understand, but which was clearly a ‘yeah right’ or ‘in your dreams’-type comment. Then all the others would bounce in their chairs, cover their faces and giggle. It was juvenile to the point of being pathetic. At some point the chairman interrupted proceedings in an effort to stop them, but to no avail.
Question