Reaction to FNB advert like Lady Macbeth’s guilty rants

It is never a good sign when an organisation or individual completely overreacts to perceived criticism. As the simmering discontent of South Africa’s underclass boils over into open revolt and violence and as corrupt shoot-to-kill cops are increasingly deployed in places as far flung as Marikana, De Doorns and Sasolburg to protect the old and new elites from the wrath of the dispossessed, some politicians are increasingly resembling Lady Macbeth, driven by their guilt and shame to commit ever more heinous misdeeds. The hysterical and often undemocratic response of various ANC and SACP structures to the silly First National Bank (FNB) advertising campaign is a case in point.

In Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, Lady Macbeth urges her husband to kill Duncan, the king, to allow Macbeth to satisfy his ambitions of becoming king. She overrides all of her husband’s objections by challenging his manhood and he relents and kills Duncan. Later Lady Macbeth becomes racked with guilt and sleepwalks through the palace, haunted by the murder of the former king. In this trance she tries to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, shouting: “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!—One, two. Why, then, ’tis time to do ’t. Hell is murky!—Fie, my lord, fie! A soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him.”

The response of the ANC, the ANC Youth League and the SACP to the FNB campaign resembles the attempts of Lady Macbeth to clean imaginary bloodstains from her hands.

“What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?”

The FNB campaign includes videos of young South Africans apparently speaking their minds. In one of the videos a participant says: “Stop voting for the same government in hopes for change – instead, change your hopes to a government that has the same hopes as us.”

The ANC Youth League and SACP joined the ANC in slamming the campaign, with the league saying it was “deeply angered and disappointed” by the bank’s “treacherous” campaign. On Sunday, Youth League spokeswoman Khusela Sangoni-Khawe said FNB had failed in trying to “recreate an Arab Spring of some sort in South Africa” and said it “uses children to make unproven claims of a government rife with corruption. We call upon South Africans to close ranks against what is a treacherous attack on our country.”

ANC spokesperson Jackson Mthembu said the ANC (who is never directly mentioned in any of the videos) was “appalled” by the campaign in which the ANC, its leadership and government were “under attack” the campaign was an “undisguised political statement that makes random and untested accusations against our government in the name of discourse. While we believe that people are entitled to their views, we don’t accept that young kids should be used as proxies to articulate political views espoused, as in the case of the FNB advertisement.”

“Out, damned spot! Out, I say!”

These vehement reactions to what appear to be rather mild criticisms of the government and platitudes about one’s right to vote for the party of one’s choice (widely accepted in any functioning democracy) are curious for several reasons.

First, whatever one might think of FNB and its advertising campaign (and I am not a fan of the campaign or of the lily-livered manner in which the bank caved in to political thugs), the manner in which several ANC and SACP spokespersons conflated the ANC with the state and with the country is worrying. The ANC is not the state. Neither is it the sole representative of the South African people. South Africa, in the words of the Freedom Charter, belongs to all who live in it – it does not belong to the ANC. Like any political party, the ANC deserves to be praised when it does something well and deserves to be criticised when it abandons the poor that it professes to love and serve.

Second, the statement that the FNB campaign is treacherous and tries to recreate the Arab Spring, is anti-democratic and – I am sorry to have to use such an emotive term – proto-fascist. There is nothing wrong with telling people that they should refrain from voting for the governing party. Voting for whomever one pleases is at the heart of political freedom in a democratic state. Every democratic election is based on a fair and free contestation between political parties in which we are all allowed to express our preferences.

We are also all free to try and convince others to vote for the ANC, to vote for the DA, or to vote for the TP (Tender Party), for that matter. It is probably not a great business model for a Bank to get involved in an advertising campaign that might alienate the majority of voters, but if it does, there is nothing treacherous about it. If FNB had not pulled the adverts I might even have lauded the bank for putting its principles (which one may agree or disagree with) before naked profits.

The Arab Spring refers to various uprisings organised by oppressed populations in countries where citizens did not enjoy political rights and where democratic contestation and free and fair elections could not be held. To refer to an advertising campaign in which a teenager urges people in South Africa to vote for the party of their choice as an attempt to recreate an Arab Spring, suggests the ANC Youth league believes that South Africa is not a democracy, that its citizens are oppressed and do not enjoy political rights and that they will never be allowed to change the government by using their vote. Like Lady Macbeth wandering in a trance and trying to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, the ANC Youth League is revealing rather more than it intended about its own undemocratic tendencies. Pity Jackson Mthembu will not display the same sense of outrage about this full-frontal attack on our democracy.

Whether one is a staunch ANC supporter or a supporter of the right wing Freedom Front Plus, if one supports democracy one will not be appalled by the fact that an institution has dared to criticise a political party. Only proto-fascists would be appalled by the fact that a bank has dared to broadcast statements criticising the government.

One might, of course, disagree with the sentiments expressed by the youngsters in the FNB produced videos, and the ANC has every right to express its disagreement with some of the statments made by the youngsters. But claiming that the sentiments are treacherous or that it is not legitimate to criticise the party displays the kind of undemocratic intolerance that cannot be associated with a party who supports democracy.

Personally I find that it is better to ignore attacks that are far-fetched or motivated by racism, hatred or a complete lack of information. That is what I do when I am criticised for something I have written. “Don’t feed the trolls,” I tell myself every time I read the unhinged invective of faceless loonies on my Blog. If the criticism is serious, one either responds to it by pointing out why and how it is wrong, or one takes it on board and changes one’s behaviour. Just a thought: use it, don’t use it.

One does not tell those who criticise that they are committing treason or that they are attacking the state merely because one happens (for the time being) to be the party of government.

I was reluctant even to enter this discussion, not because I am fearful of repercussions, but because what I have written here is so obvious and because all this fuss about a bank’s advertising campaign detracts attention from the far more important social and economic issues facing the country.

Maybe that is why the campaign has attracted such hysterical responses from the ANC and its partners. Like Lady Macbeth, whose paranoid dreams symbolises the fact that she is haunted by her guilt, the ANC reaction is perhaps a symptom of the fear and guilt that stalks the political class in South Africa. As Marikana, De Doorns and Sasolburg have shown, the poor, economically excluded and marginalised members of society have not benefited as handsomely from the end of apartheid as the members of the old (mostly white) and emerging (mostly black) middle classes.

While those in the chattering classes squabble about silly adverts made to promote the commercial interests of a big bank and argue whether these adds exploit children, many of those same children are dropping out of school or receiving a third rate education because of the cowardice of politicians who are too scared to take on a powerful union. While I write about the nature of democracy, members of social movement are harassed and tortured by the police. While Helen Zille spends her days on twitter, blaming the poor for the lack of services in their communities in Cape Town, millions of South Africans go to bed hungry, wondering whether this wonderful democracy will ever guarantee them a full stomach.

Source: Constitutionally Speaking

'Youth must not fight old battles'

The youth in South Africa need to stop fighting their leaders’ battles, DA national spokesman Mmusi Maimane said on Thursday. “We have a new South Africa led by old South Africans with old South African thinking,” Maimane said in Johannesburg. “We need to look at what are we mobilising the youth to do.”

He said it was concerning when young people stood up and said they would kill for their leaders, and called to make provinces ungovernable. Former ANCYL leader Julius Malema said in 2008 that he was prepared to “take up arms and kill for [President Jacob] Zuma”. The league recently said it intended making the Western Cape ungovernable.

Maimane was speaking at a debate, hosted by the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, between the Democratic Alliance, the Young Communist League of SA, and the ANC Youth League, about youth participation and mobilisation.

YCLSA national chairman Yershen Pillay said the country’s youth needed bold and radical policy decisions. “We need less dependence on the State if we are going to drive change.” This was why the proposed youth wage subsidy would not work. “It doesn’t adequately respond to... the unemployment we face.” Pillay said the youth subsidy served the interest of business rather than the youth, and did not consider the education and skills gap. The YCLSA was proposing a medium-term, and a long-term plan for 2050. This included investment in co-operative development. “We need to give young people a chance,” said Pillay. “There needs to be a cultural change, make education fashionable.” He said the youth needed education and skills development, access to information, and entrepreneurship development. “You have a melting pot of interventions. A culture of service needs to replace a culture of entitlement,” said Pillay.

The ANCYL’s Vuyo Roji said there were people in South Africa who wanted the economic status quo to stay the same. “There are enemies,” he said. On the National Development Plan tabled in Parliament on Wednesday, Roji said the ANCYL did not believe a “political elite” could solve the problems. “We don’t think academics can sit in a corner and tell us what we need to do.” The ANCYL’s vision was to have an economy which eliminated poverty. He said the youth league still believed in nationalising strategic sectors of the economy, expropriation of land without compensation, and free education. Youth leaders needed to provide leadership. “They must be able to persuade and be persuaded,” he said.

Source: Sowetan

The ANCYL's memorandum to Helen Zille

Memorandum of demands from ANCYL Dullah Omar Region & others to the Premier of the Western Cape, Helen Zille, July 27 2012:

Memorandum of Demands

To: Western Cape Premier - Helen Zille

From : ANCYL, ANC, ANCWL, Cosatu, Taxi Association (CATA and Codeta) including other progressive formations.

The ANC Youth League (ANCYL) together with the above mentioned organizations have decided to embark on this revolutionary peoples march to the Provincial Parliament led by the Democratic Alliance (DA). This revolutionary march is inspired by the sad and gross conditions which our people continue to find themselves in on a daily basis.

Our people have never fought and died for another special type of apartheid to be born under a democratic government since 1994. Our parents, brothers and sisters gave up their lives in pursuit of a democratic, non- racial and non-sexist society. In 1994, our parents never voted to be led by a government that will re-introduce apartheid of a special type.

Since 2006 and 2009 when the DA took over the province,it has been concentrating on a programme to bring back apartheid in our lifetime. We have seen deliberate and concerted efforts and plans to divide and run amongst our people who are Africans, Coloured, Muslims and Indians. "We have seen statements like "take back what belongs to you", "Refugees" and so on. Whilst we wait patiently for our government to deliver to us constitutional rights in service, we see the DA undermining the National Government of the ANC through unfounded accusations of corruptions and incompetency.

We see the DA running around the entire country pointing failures of the ANC National Government whilst in the Western Cape there are huge failures and people live in dire situations. Today Cde and fellow Cape Tonians, We are here to unmask what is the real DA. Who is the DA fighting for? Who is Helen Zille?

The DA is a group of few white people who are bitter, angry and adamant in bringing back Apartheid at all cost. White South Africans refuse to live along side by side with Africans, Coloureds, Indians, Muslims and Khoi people. The DA keeps on painting a glossy picture about how we can live as a rainbow nation whilst the majority of our people live in the gutter and shacks. Today, we are saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Ons is gatvol! Sanele!

We are gatvol because black people in the Western Cape continue to be tea girls and garden boys under the DA government which continues to perpetuate this by encouraging young people to work for labour brokers and other non-progressive and counter revolutionary businesses on a basis of getting experience which will make them employable in a capitalist state. We are saying to madam Zille, we do not want to make this province ungovernable and unworkable because we are quite capable of doing that and we are ready even now!!!

We demand the following from you and your collective government:

1. Land

We demand that land that is owned by private people and companies be made available for the building of decent houses and creation of better communities where black people and white live together. We demand the land in Rondebosch Square among many so that our people will live together as the constitution dictates so. This land must be made available for the poorest of the poor.

2. Service delivery

We demand that electricity is an essential service and it ought to be given to people without being made to suffer for it. We demand a speedy electrification of our poor and disadvantage areas. It is inhumane for people in 19 years of a democratic government to still live in darkness and only rely on candles and paraffin for energy.

We demand the DA administration to provide proper sanitation to our communities. 19 years into democracy our people still relieve themselves in Pota-loos. This violates our constitutional right, that of proper decent sanitation. It also perpetuates health hazards such as diarrhoea and ringworms. The bucket system is a mechanism to kill our people as the Premier referred to them "REFUGEES".

3. Human Settlement - 17 Billion - 1.7 spent?

We demand that the MEC to be dismissed including his department officials with immediate effect and be replaced by a more competent person who will not be remote controlled by Zille. The department is full of corruption till to date there is no one held accountable for this. Our people demand a speedy delivering of houses to people who have been on a waiting list for ever. We demand that all hostels in Mananberg, Elsie's River, Hanover Park etc built during the apartheid era to be demolished and that people get decent houses where they will live happily in their new democratic government.

We demand that people get houses closer to the CBD and not far from where they work. The view of locating our people as far as West Coast closer to the Malmesbury is ridiculous and absurd. We want houses in Rondebosch square and in Constantia. We know the department of human settlement in the City of Cape had a budget of R17billion and only R1.7 Billion was spent and none of our areas benefitted out of this. Zille must tell us where is the money?

We demand an end to TRA's because the government of Zille has clearly displayed that it does not understand what the meaning of temporary is. People in Mfuleni among other areas are dying in these fridges. A child died in Mfuleni Bosasa TRA's and nothing was done by government. How many more must die Zille???

We demand that all shacks within the City and Province to be eradicated by not later than 2014!!!

4. Safety and Security

We demand that Mr Dan Plato follow Mr Madikizela as he too proved to be a useless duck. Crime has escalated to its highest levels within the Western Cape and City of Cape Town under the rule of DA. Nyanga has not once but twice became the murder capital of the nation. Mananberg and Hanover Park children swim in drugs and guns yet the MEG and Zille smile, say that it is normal.

Why are police stations in the townships not given the necessary resources they need? Why are all security agencies deployed in Sea Point, Camps Bay and Constantia where there is little crime compared to our areas? The calling of SANDF proves that the government of Zille has failed our people. She is incompetent and a disaster. Madam Zille please do us a favour, JUST RESIGN!!!

5. Youth Wage Subsidy

We demand that this subsidy be discarded with immediate effect. This only just complements the labour broking system that is killing our people and youth in particular. We demand that decent employment and interventions to the levels of high employment be implemented. In the City of Cape Town alone, unemployment is at 33% - 40%. And worse there is no Youth policy that seeks to resolve this crisis.

The Youth of South Africa through a National Youth Parliament that was here in the Western Cape rejected this Policy. We are saying nothing about us without us. We demand a youth development policy and a program of job seekers grant to be researched and implemented.

6. Closure of 27 Schools

We demand that this attempt of closing six schools in our region must come to an end. Again, this proves that the DA government wants to reverse the gains made by our people in 1994.These schools have not only provided quality and meaningful contact time with learners, they are closer to their homes and do not have to travel long distances to reach school. We urge the provincial government to took into the matter and rather provide mechanisms to address the shortcomings faced by these schools. Do not close the schools!

7. Non delivery of Text books

The DA administration upholds the constitution of South Africa supreme. However it does not deliver to basic rights of our people, the right to education. The no delivery of textbooks to our schools is a disgrace and an indication that the DA administration undermines the rights of the people of South Africa, black in particular because the only schools that do not have textbooks are those found in black communities like Kraaifontein.

8. The IRT

The introduction of the IRT system in the transport industry has disabled the taxi industry. It has taken away jobs and businesses of taxi owners and drivers. 54 taxis had to stop operating due to this system that robbed families of their household income. We urge the provincial government to embark in a program that will revitalise the taxi industry and provide mechanical support to taxis that need service for the safety of passengers. The IRT costs taxpayers millions and we have seen in recent times that it is running at a loss!

Conclusion

We demand that the abovementioned demands be positively responded to within 7 working days. Failure to do so the young people and the abovementioned stakeholders will make this city and province ungovernable! Amandla!!!!

Issued by the ANCYL Dullah Omar Region on behalf of the People of the Western Cape.

July 27 2012

Source: Politics Web

The communists have got this right

Here’s something important to read and understand. From a South African Communist Party Central Committee statement  released today – I just caught it on Politicsweb here.

You can disagree with the communists about a range of points of strategy and of principle, but they accurately and urgently identify populism as exemplified by the ANC Youth League ruling faction (and be clear, this is what they are talking about) as the greatest threat to the ruling alliance and, more importantly, to the South African democracy.

This is their call to arms:

We are dealing with an anti-worker, anti-left, anti-communist, pseudo-militant demagogy that betrays all of our long-held ANC-alliance traditions of internal organizational democracy, mutual respect for comrades, non-racialism, and service to our people. It has created substantial space for an anti-majoritarian, conservative reactive groundswell that seeks to tarnish the whole movement, portraying us all as anti-constitutionalist and as narrow nationalist chauvinists.

It was only a matter of time before a rescue attempt of the sliding democratic project was launched from within the alliance. It was always going to come either from Cosatu or the SACP – and despite its lack of a mass base, the SACP is more venerable and respected within the ANC

The communist leadership has dissipate into government and its voice has been softer and more defensive as a result. It remains to be seen if the party is still able to crack the whip loud enough to drive our domestic version of Zanu-PF back into its cage.

Source: Nic Borain

Defiant Juju thumbs nose at ANC's bid 'to silence him'

In open defiance of the conditions of his suspension from the ANC, youth league leader Julius Malema has addressed a church service in Butterworth in the Eastern Cape. The SABC reported that Malema had spoken out against what he called "individuals trying to silence him" at a second church service which he had attended.

"I will never be silenced. There is nobody who has a right to silence me," the Dispatch Online quoted Malema as saying on Friday. "The right to speak was given to me from the day I was born." According to the Dispatch Online, Malema said he was not at the Last Move Ministries church to speak politics. "When everything is difficult out there, the only safe place is church because in church you don't discriminate. We are here to receive blessings. We want the church to pray for us because those that used to be our friends have turned against us. They have not only turned against us but plan our death," he was quoted as saying.

In a statement on Thursday, ANC Youth League spokesperson Floyd Shivambu said: "In celebrating Easter Friday and commemorating the life of Solomon Mahlangu, president Julius Malema will visit the Twelve Apostles' Church in Christ in Butterworth."

Mahlangu was an Umkhonto we Sizwe soldier hanged by the apartheid government in 1979. Malema was visiting the church in his capacity as the league's president, Shivambu said. He said Malema had not spoken at the Twelve Apostles' Church in Christ, but the embattled youth league leader had reportedly attended a second church service at Last Move Ministries, where he did speak.

This was Malema's first public appearance since the suspension. According to the SABC he was accompanied by members of the league's national executive committee, the provincial executive and National Youth Development Agency chair, Andile Lungisa.

On Wednesday, Malema was gagged and temporarily suspended by the ANC's national disciplinary committee (NDC), a move which forbids him exercising any duty as an ANC member, president of the ANCYL or member of the Limpopo provincial executive committee. Malema's temporary suspension from the party followed comments he made at a centenary lecture at the University of the Witwatersrand last Friday. Malema called ANC President Jacob Zuma a dictator and said he was suppressing the youth league. The ANCYL leader was informed on Wednesday morning of his immediate temporary suspension, and that the NDC would bring disciplinary proceedings against him. The NDC had instituted special measures because of Malema's repeated behaviour. Malema is appealing his expulsion from the ANC for sowing division in the party and for bringing it into disrepute. The appeals hearing was expected to take place on April 12.

The two disciplinary proceedings are separate.

Source: Mail & Guadian

Today they come for Malema…..

President Jacob Zuma is not a person who seems to take kindly to criticism (and neither is he someone who can take a joke at his expense). One might even claim that he seems a bit, well, thin skinned (if not, dare I say, dictatorial) in his attitude towards those who say things about him that he does not like. Not that Julius Malema has shown a lot of tolerance towards those within the Youth League who have dared to criticise him or who opposed his leadership at one time or another. In fact, these two leaders, may, ironically, be cut from the same kind of cloth.

A few years ago Zuma announced that he was going to sue Zapiro for R5 million because he claimed the cartoonist had defamed him after the cartoonist had published a cartoon in which he suggested Zuma was violating the justice system to avoid facing fraud and corruption charges.

It therefore comes as no surprise that the National Disciplinary Committee (NDC) of the ANC – ostensibly acting completely independently of President Zuma (yeah right!) – announced this morning that it was temporarily suspending Julius Malema from the ANC with immediate effect. The purported reason for this suspension is that Malema allegedly brought the ANC into disrepute. (Malema had already been expelled from the ANC earlier, but his appeal regarding the expulsion is to be heard only later this month.)

Apparently the ANC as an organisation is brought into disrepute if one of its members criticises the leader of the party in public. (Criticism might be the lifeblood of any democratic culture, but public criticism of leaders has now suddenly become alien to the culture of the ANC – at least if that criticism is levelled at President Zuma.) How any political party can remain democratic and how it can renew itself and correct mistakes, when its members are not allowed to criticise the party leader in public, is unclear. Maybe criticism can be communicated in secret messages with the assistance of the intelligence services?

Of course, this ban on any public criticism of a sitting leader is not based on a principle that was followed by President Zuma and his supporters during his fight with former President Thabo Mbeki. But I guess consistency and an abiding respect for high principles is not really what is in play here. What is at play is President Zuma’s future survival. Remember, he might well believe that he will either get a second term or he will go to jail for 15 years, so (in his eyes) there might not be time for niceties such as respect for democratic debate inside the party.

Malema now faces fresh disciplinary charges, which will obviously lapse once the ANC Appeal Committee confirms Malema’s expulsion – surely only a formality. This is after Malema criticised Zuma on Friday in the following terms:

It is under President Zuma that we have seen the youth of the ANC being traumatised, being expelled from their own home. It is under President Zuma we have seen a critical voice being suppressed We have seen under President Zuma, democracy being replaced with dictatorship. We have seen an intolerance….people, who become impatient with the youth….

The NDC did not say who complained about the utterances made by Malema. It did stipulate the following (once again rather draconian and probably not entirely enforceable) conditions that Malema will be required to comply with during his suspension:

He will not exercise any duty in his capacity as an ANC member, President of the ANC Youth League and/or Member of the Provincial Executive Committee of the ANC Limpopo Province;
He will not attend any meeting of the ANC or any of its structures, including the Leagues, except for the purpose of the NDCA hearing and the pending disciplinary proceedings to be instituted against him.

He will not address any meeting of the ANC or any of its structures, including the Leagues, whether as an invited guest, in his capacity as President of the ANC Youth League and/or as a member of the ANC; and
He will not make any public statement on any matter pertaining to the ANC.

Of course, the first thing to note is that this will bring the clash between the Youth League and the mother body of the ANC to a head, as Malema is forbidden from attending any Youth League meeting, which the League insists can operate free from the discipline of the ANC.

Members of the Youth League Executive (with or without Malema) will now have to decide either to defy this order of the disciplinary committee or face disciplinary charges and expulsion themselves. What happens if they continue arguing that the Youth League Executive members cannot be ordered around by the mother body and cannot say whether Malema should sit on the League’s Executive or not? What if the Executive continues meeting with Malema as its President? Surely they will all then have to be suspended as well and then ultimately expelled.

President Zuma seems to have learnt well from the “mistakes” of Thabo Mbeki and he is taking no chances with those who might oppose him. Cut off their heads before they can gather steam, seems to be his motto. Whether this is a democratic attitude or closer to the dictatorial style that Malema spoke about, I leave to the judgment of the readers.

Secondly, an order purporting to ban Malema from making any public statements on any matter pertaining to the ANC infringes on Malema’s right to freedom of expression. Our Bill of Rights can also bind private individuals, organisations and political parties and I am almost certain that when an organisation bans a member from making any statements about that organisation in public that organisation is in breach of the Bill of Rights. For this reason, the probably unconstitutional censoring of Malema by the NDC seems troubling, to say the least.

A further irony is of course that this immediate suspension and the draconian (and partially unconstitutional) nature of the “conditions” imposed on Malema during this latest suspension nicely seems to illustrate the point Malema was making in his speech about the intolerance of Zuma to dissent and the inability of the leadership to listen to and accept criticism of ANC leaders and policies.

By making these points I am not arguing that Malema was wise to make the statements that got him into trouble today. Neither am I claiming that I believe Malema is an eternal democrat who is saying these things because he really has the best interests of the ANC at heart. Yet, as I warned before, one must be careful to cheer on this silencing of debate and dissent inside the ANC merely because the person being silenced is someone with whose views one does not agree and whose downfall one might applaud.

Today they come for Malema. Tomorrow they might come for you or me.

Source: Constitutionally Speaking

African National Congress Acts to Silence a Critic

Julius Malema, the polarizing leader of the African National Congress Youth League, was abruptly suspended from the party on Wednesday, effectively silencing him within South Africa’s main political body as he fights for his political life. The announcement came after a speech on Friday in which Mr. Malema accused President Jacob Zuma of becoming a dictator, and after a highly unusual news conference on Tuesday by the party’s top leadership to denounce divisive squabbles.

The decision to silence Mr. Malema, analysts say, is less about finishing off his waning political prospects than an effort by Mr. Zuma to quell serious speculation that one or more senior party members will seek to unseat him as president of the A.N.C. and the country at the party’s leadership conference in December. Mr. Zuma himself rose to the presidency by defeating his predecessor, Thabo Mbeki, in a leadership fight in 2007 in which Mr. Malema and the Youth League played a central role.

“It was beginning to look as if Zuma wasn’t in charge of his own organization,” said Steven Friedman, director of the Center for the Study of Democracy. “He needed to show who’s boss.”

The suspension is the latest and in some way the harshest punishment meted out against Mr. Malema, who was once one of Mr. Zuma’s most ardent supporters but has become a harsh critic.

Mr. Malema was convicted at the end of February in an internal disciplinary trial of sowing division within the party, and was sentenced to expulsion. The A.N.C., which prizes its reputation for fairness, allowed Mr. Malema to keep his membership while he appealed the expulsion, a process that will continue despite the latest decision. In the meantime, he had been using A.N.C. events and the support of some top party leaders to press his case with the rank and file, casting himself as the victim of a stultified elite wary of his radical ideas to help the poor. With his suspension, he has lost access to that platform. He also faces multiple investigations into his personal finances: he has become a wealthy man while leading the Youth League, and has been frequently accused of corruption.

Mr. Malema is no stranger to outrageous remarks. He revived the anti-apartheid struggle song “Shoot the Boer,” a term for white farmers, leading him to be convicted of using hate speech. He called a BBC reporter a “bloody agent.” Back when he was close to Mr. Zuma, he declared himself ready to die for the man. But on Friday, Mr. Malema apparently went too far when he attacked Mr. Zuma at a Youth League event to celebrate the A.N.C.’s centennial.

“It is under President Zuma we have seen a critical voice being suppressed,” Mr. Malema told a cheering crowd at the University of the Witwatersrand. “We have seen under President Zuma democracy being replaced with dictatorship.”

Also on stage was Mathews Phosa, the party treasurer and one of six members of the A.N.C.’s national executive committee. Mr. Phosa has been a supporter of Mr. Malema and a critic of Mr. Zuma. Mr. Malema has also courted Kgalema Motlanthe, a former president and now Mr. Zuma’s deputy, who appeared at another Youth League event where Mr. Zuma was harshly criticized. But both potential rivals appeared at Mr. Zuma’s side at a news conference on Tuesday, which was held by Gwede Mantashe, the party’s secretary general, in an effort to project a united front. The fact that members of the executive committee who seemed to be at odds with the president could be compelled to show up demonstrated that Mr. Zuma, despite deep divisions within the party, is likely to be re-elected, said Karema Brown, a veteran political analyst.

“It was an important show of force,” Ms. Brown said. “And of course it wasn’t a show of unity. It was a real demonstration of power. If he didn’t have that power, he wouldn’t have been able to get them to sit there.”

The A.N.C., like any big political party, has always struggled to keep its diverse membership and ambitious leadership under one big tent, though not always successfully. The most acrimonious and public infighting was that which led to the ouster of Mr. Mbeki, Nelson Mandela’s chosen successor, as party president in 2007. He was soon pushed out as president of the country as well, temporarily replaced by his deputy, Mr. Motlanthe, and eventually by the man he had previously fired as his deputy, Mr. Zuma. Every attempt to undercut the party’s power by splitting it has ended in failure. The most recent effort, the Congress of the People, founded by disgruntled supporters of Mr. Mbeki, has struggled to attract votes and has been riven by rivalries.

Source: New York Times

'People's president' on the defensive

As the battle for leadership positions in the ANC intensifies, President Jacob Zuma has tightened up his security. His intelligence advisers are insisting that all who attend party and government events where he is speaking must be accredited, probably to avoid ugly scenes such as those witnessed during a speech in the Western Cape last month. Zuma's lecture on the ANC's second president, Sefako Makgatho, was disrupted by angry ANC Youth League members, who heckled him in front of international dignitaries and demanded to know why former league leader Julius Malema was expelled from the ANC.

Since then, Zuma's intelligence chiefs have been taking no chances and have barred anyone without proper accreditation from attending his public meetings. The decision has angered some ANC leaders, who accused him of using state security agencies to fight internal party-political battles in the run-up to the party's elective conference in Mangaung. Zuma is facing an internal revolt by militants in the party who want to replace him with his deputy, Kgalema Motlanthe. Last week, many ANC community members in Middelburg in Mpumalanga who could not produce accreditation were turned away by Zuma's heavily armed security detail. Zuma was delivering the Zacharias Mahabane memorial lecture, part of the ANC's centenary celebrations.

According to Clarence Maseko, the youth league's provincial secretary in Mpumalanga, hundreds of people were turned away at the entrance of the town's Steve Tshwete Hall. "The memorial lecture was convened under a big cloud of paranoia. The Steve Tshwete banquet hall has a capacity of 5 000 people but only 2 500 [people] were allowed because they were accredited," said Maseko. "[Even] people from around the area [Ekangala region] were turned away and not invited, as is tradition. They [ANC leaders close to Zuma] made sure people who attended were from outside. "They bussed in cronies from the Ehlanzeni and Gert Sibande regions [Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza's strongholds] because they sing praises of him and President Zuma. The people close to Mabuza and some intelligence agents thought the people from around would embarrass the president and disrupt his speech," Maseko said.

ANC spokesperson Keith Khoza this week said that the accreditation of community members was part of the party's efforts to improve event management. He said the Middelburg and recent Human Rights Day Kliptown events were not the only ones where people had to be accredited. "We did this during the Siyanqoba rally held at the FNB Stadium last year," he said. "The ANC could account [for] each and every person in that rally. It's a [new] system we are using … Those without accreditations can listen to the president on TV or radio. A lecture is not like public meetings; it's intimate."

However, some ANC leaders and critics of Zuma said it was a clear sign that the president was losing touch with the masses. A senior ANC leader said Zuma had become inaccessible even to some of the senior members of the alliance. "To secure a meeting with President Zuma can take years now. In the past, he was available to the leaders of Cosatu and the SACP [South African Communist Party], rightwingers, church leaders, bereaved families, but all this is now impossible," the leader said.

Political analyst Zamikhaya Maseti said the first victims of inaccessibility to Zuma were the working class who made up Cosatu. "They supported him with their lives in the run-up to Polokwane and now they deeply feel a sense of betrayal and alienation from a man who they thought would be a better listening president than his predecessor, Thabo Mbeki. But now, like Mbeki, whom they accused of aloofness and arrogance, he is always on international travel and is nowhere to be found on the ground," Maseti said. "The second disconnection people feel with Zuma is born out of his decision to discontinue the presidential imbizos made famous by Mbeki. If he is a man of the people, why did he get rid of the presidential imbizos, which were a great opportunity for the president of the country to interact with people, councillors, mayors, and listen to issues affecting them?"

ANC Veterans' League president Sandi Sejake said the issue of accreditation for ANC and community members was new and foreign to the culture and traditions of the ANC. "The ANC has changed a lot," Sejake said. "ANC members become important only when the party wants votes. It used to be a voluntary party. Today you go and buy a person. This [accreditation issue] is part of buying people. We are departing from the culture of the ANC."

Presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj said: "The ANC, like any other political party or civil organisation, is responsible for ensuring that its events and functions are conducted in an orderly manner, without untoward disruption and without endangering life and property. To this end it is also able to call on the services of the SAPS, which would respond to any given situation on the basis of their own evaluation."

ANC spokesperson Jackson Mthembu said accreditation was not "a new thing". "It has always been the norm. For each and every indoor activity of the ANC, such as public lectures, people are required to have accreditation so that we are able to manage issues such as capacity. We do not ask people for accreditation to [attend] rallies."

Source: Mail & Guardian

Malema vows to take fight against expulsion to court

Embattled ANC youth league president Julius Malema will seek redress in the courts if he is expelled from the party, he said on Sunday. Malema remains president of the ANCYL pending his appeal against a decision to expel him by the ANC's national disciplinary committee. Until now he has consistently rejected the idea of taking legal action against the ANC. "I said I would not go to court, but now I have decided to do so," Malema said. "I need no mandate and act as an individual whose rights have been violated." This would not contradict the principles of the ANC, as he would no longer be an ANC member.

Malema was speaking at an ANCYL centenary rally at the Nkowankowa Stadium, outside Tzaneen. He called on the crowd not to abandon the ANC, calling it the only hope for the country's poor. He reminded the crowd that while individuals would come and go, the ANC would continue. "I will never be welcomed in the ANC. I have been fired in the ANC. But I have no problem with that," he said.

He did not regret anything he had done, Malema said. "I did what I believed in and I did it on my own. I was not told by anyone to do anything. "I have not been chased from heaven, but from the ANC by a faction that can only do so as they currently have power."

The ANCYL was being victimised by its own leaders, Malema said. "They are trying to punish anyone associated with the ANCYL as if we are an illegal association." He would not accept being victimised by anyone, he said. Those who are supposed to support and protect the ANCYL were scared to do so. "We are orphans standing alone. Our leaders are scared. They prefer their positions above speaking out for what is right," he told the crowd. "There is no longer a youth league of the ANC. We are a former self. They have succeeded in killing us."

Also speaking at the rally, Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe said revolution was deliberate and methodical, and never accidental. He could barely be heard in the stadium above the conversations of the crowd. "The ANC has no use for a passive youth league. We need our youth league to be militant, creative and determined. When the call is given, the youth must answer rapidly," he said. The youth had to be afforded space to generate new ideas.

The ANC expected the ANCYL to recruit youth and remain relevant to the youth. "It is the ANC's duty to show and lead the ANCYL if it strays from the path. We must guide them all the time. They can't stray off the path and go off on their own," Motlanthe said. The ANCYL had been formed by the ANC to feed and form the youth in preparation for becoming ANC members, said Sports Minister Fikile Mbalula, himself a former ANCYL president. "No one will destroy the ANCYL," he said. "You are here to create new ideas. Once the ANCYL ceases to think we will be in danger. Once they suffer political dwarfism the revolution will be in danger."

Messages of support for the ANCYL were sent by the ANC Women's League and the ANC Veterans' League, as well as youth organisations from all over Africa, including Zimbabwe, Ghana, Namibia and Ethiopia.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Let justice, fairness be our guide

FIRST up, I must confess that I am one of those who secretly (or maybe not so secretly) celebrated the unceremonious ousting of Thabo Mbeki from the presidency of the South African republic. He had caused so much harm to the country that it seemed okay for the ANC to give him a solid punch in the ribs and make him feel the pain that he had made others feel. As I watched his farewell address that Sunday night in September 2008, a part of me sadistically enjoyed seeing the humiliation he was being subjected to. Never mind that it was all wrong, unprocedural and, most likely, unconstitutional. I, and many other South Africans, were just happy to see the back of someone, who had suffocated the nation with his near tyrannical leadership style and his icy heart. Yes, today we miss his intellect and vision, but we should never forget the ditch into which he nearly drove us. However, nothing can detract from the fact that the bloodless 2008 coup set a bad precedent for our republic.

We should make sure that even if the ANC does not give President Jacob Zuma a second party term in December, the party should under no circumstances be allowed to cut short his presidency. As torturous as this might be, principle should trounce passions. In the past week, the demise of ANC Youth League president Julius Malema was widely celebrated. When ANC bigwig Cyril Ramaphosa - who chairs the party's national disciplinary committee of appeals - confirmed the youth leader's guilt and sentence on Saturday, there was a collective sigh of relief from Constantia to Khutsong. Finally, the Mario Balotelli of our politics had been red-carded. One might argue that this was rightly so.

Like Mbeki, Malema has done a lot of harm to the country. It is therefore easy to understand why we are all inclined to ululate as he is blindfolded and led to the raised platform where he will hang until his neck breaks. Except for the fact that he swears by the skull and crossbones that symbolise the venerable 75-year-old South African institution called Orlando Pirates, Malema has no saving graces.

I had hoped against all hope that the honourable men and women on the ANC's appeals committee would rise above self-interest politics and allow their integrity to dictate their decision-making. At this juncture, as the comrades are wont to say, we should pause and ask ourselves if it is right and proper that Malema should be executed in this fashion for the sake of political expediency.

No doubt the country will be a much better place without Malema on newspaper front pages and at the top of broadcast bulletins every other day. His divisive verbosity will not be missed. Investors will nod. Ministers and policy-makers will no longer have to waste their breath explaining that nationalisation is not official policy but one young man's thoughts in the bath. Minority interest groups will have to find a new bogey. Farmers will not see Robert Mugabe on their doorsteps. The cantankerous chief from Ulundi will be less concerned that his grandchildren will be recruited into the ANC against his will. Hellen Zille and Lindiwe Mazibuko will be subjected to fewer insults. Mazibuko can make her tea and Zille can inject herself with botox with gay abandon. South Africans will not be subjected to to the sewer rhetoric that Malema had reduced political discourse to. Most crucially, Zuma's re-election strategists will sleep easier and plan better for the ANC's Mangaung elective conference. (That is all, of course, assuming that Malema is finished, which is far from conclusive at this point. Like Mgqumeni of Nquthu, Malema might rise from the dead and wow the masses again.)

But is the imminent execution right and proper? Is the elevation of political short-term gain above principle the right thing for a country that is trying to deepen and entrench a democratic culture? This lowly newspaperman thinks not.

Let's just take a cold look at the sins Malema is said to have committed against the ANC. As leader of the ANC Youth League, he led the charge against Botswana's governing party. He called for regime change in that country, labelling Ian Khama's government a puppet of Western imperialism. He did not call for a military overthrow of the government, but rather the unification of opposition forces for the democratic removal of the Botswana Democratic Party. By the way the "D" part of the party's name is almost as appropriate as North Korea's depiction of itself as democratic.

Now many in the ANC - including the secretary-general, members of the national executive and officials of other party structures - have pronounced themselves on foreign policy issues. Be it Zimbabwe, Israel, Swaziland or Tibet, we have heard differing views from individual members of the ANC leadership. Having read the national disciplinary committee's reasoning on the matter, I am still none the wiser as to why Botswana should be a holy cow, other than the fact that it has more cattle than human beings in its sovereign territory.

Malema's other serious offence was the unfavourable comparison of Zuma's leadership to that of Mbeki. Now what, pray thee, is the crime comparing the talents of the country's leaders? How are we to grow if we do not publicly share our views on the respective qualities of those who lead us? It would be a travesty if we were to create a culture where South Africans - and ANC functionaries in particular - were not able to evaluate the contribution of leaders to the development of our republic and our world. There were many other pots, spoons and saucers (euphimistically known as charges) thrown at Malema during a process in which the kangaroo court label can be deemed apt. It is a process that, as much as we may resent Malema, we will live to regret.

Rather than rushing to execute Malema, the ANC and the country should take some lessons from his rise and fall. In the rise of Malema, we should take care not to empower a demagogue to occupy centre stage in our discourse. Malema the hero and Malema the ogre were not the creation of the media and the South African public. The ANC gave birth to him, fattened him and unleashed him on an unsuspecting nation. It suited Zuma and his leadership to have an uncontrollable bloodhound to take on their opponents and external opponents. He was empowered to be the Malema that he was. The more despicable he became the more useful he was. Not once did the ANC give a care about the negative effect he was having on our body politic or the damage he was doing to our international standing. In its centenary introspections, the ANC should give careful thought to how it creates and nurtures monsters such as Malema.

Those outside the ANC should also think about how we deal with the monsters that the governing party creates. Do we empower the monsters by demonising and fearing them? Do we in the media give undue attention to the monsters that the ANC or any other societal force creates? Do we have a choice? Having done so, the ANC and the country should think seriously about the place of principle in our public discourse and the conduct of our politics.

We should make sure that no matter how much we resent, hate and fear an individual, these emotions should never compromise our commitment to justice and fairness.

Principle should always be our guide. Yesterday it was Mbeki. Today it is Malema. Tomorrow? ...

Written by Mondli Makhanya, editor-in-chief of Avusa Media newspapers

Source: The Sowetan

Malema verdict might not be something to celebrate

It is understandable that members of the chattering classes as well as other members of the public (including many rank and file members of the ANC yearning for a, perhaps mythical, simpler time when ANC Youth League members behaved properly and listened to their elders) on Saturday applauded the verdict of the ANC National Disciplinary Committee of Appeal (NDCA) which confirmed the guilty verdict against Julius Malema.

It could not have hurt that the verdict was delivered by a confident and in charge Cyril Ramaphosa, who reminded us again why so many of us have regretted the fact that he lost out to Thabo Mbeki when Mandela’s ANC had to appoint a Deputy President and why some of us still wistfully wonder what might have been if he had become our President instead of either Thabo Mbeki or Jacob Zuma.

Although some newspaper editors might miss Malema (given the fact that he has the ability to make news and sell newspapers), most of us might feel slightly relieved that this hypocritical demagogue has been dealt with so effectively and seemingly so decisively by the ANC senior leadership.

Yet, there is something about the way in which Jacob Zuma and Gwede Mantashe managed to clip Malema’s wings that sits uneasy with me. If they could do it to him, I wonder, could they do it to anyone else – including every single one of us who are members of the chattering classes and sometimes mock or criticise our dancing and singing President and every single ANC member who fails to toe the party line or who speaks out against the abuse of power or incompetence by some members of the leadership?

Is there not just a whiff of Stalinism about the way in which Zuma and Matashe got rid of a political enemy? Can we expect the pictures to be airbrushed next so that Malema will disappear completely from official ANC history?

Recall that Malema was convicted on three charges, two of them having been confirmed by the NDCA. First, he was convicted of contravening Rule 25.5 (1) of the ANC Constitution “by behaving in such a way as to provoke serious divisions or a breakdown of unity in the organisation”. His sin was that he addressed a press conference on 31 July 2011 at the conclusion of an ANC Youth League NEC meeting where he said amongst other things “in the past we know President Mbeki used that agenda very well …. The African agenda is no longer a priority and we think that there is a temptation by the coloniser and the imperialist to want to recolonise Africa in a different but sophisticated way and President Mbeki stood directly opposed to that type of conduct.”

The NDC found that through his utterances Malema sought to portray the ANC government and its leadership under President Zuma in a negative light which therefore had the potential to sow division and disunity in the ANC. The NDCA confirmed the reasoning of the NDC. The implications of this verdict are rather stark. Any ANC member who now suggests that an out of favour former President may have done some good and that he might have been better than an incumbent leader can now be kicked out of the Party for contravening Rule 25.5(1). If this principle had been applied consistently in the past, Mbeki would have been able to get rid of Zuma and most of his opponents long before the votes were counted at Polokwane. To his credit, he never used such tactics against them.

The verdict comes perilously close to suggesting that no ANC member will henceforth be allowed ever to criticise the incumbent ANC leadership in public. This is a rather handy precedent to set if one intends to stand for a second (or third) term in office or if one wishes to “manage” future leadership elections. To my mind the ruling on this point seems profoundly undemocratic and deeply dangerous and both ANC members and other members of the public should feel more than a bit worried about this move. One should not confuse approval for the outcome of this case (silencing Malema) with what is good for the ANC and South Africa and if one does, one underestimates the possible ruthlessness of the current bunch of ANC leaders aiming to secure a second term for themselves at Mangaung.

Malema was also convicted of contravening Rule 25.5 (c) of the Constitution of the ANC by behaving in such a way as to bring the organisation into disrepute. This was done for ostensibly slightly more plausible reasons, namely because he addressed a press conference on 31 July 2011 by making announcements amongst others:

* That the Botswana leadership of government poses a serious threat to Africa so we need a progressive government in Botswana;
* We are not going to sit with neighbours that conduct themselves like that. Botswana is in full co-operation with imperialists and the government is undermining the African agenda;
* The ANC Youth League would establish a Botswana Command Team which would work towards uniting all opposition forces in Botswana to oppose the puppet regime of Botswana led by the Botswana Democratic Party.

Now, imagine, for a moment that the statement did not relate to Botswana but to Zimbabwe and that Zwelenzima Vavi had made it and not Malema. Imagine Vavi had said that Robert Mugabe and his Zanu-PF had ruined Zimbabwe and that Cosatu would mobilise ANC members to oppose the murderous regime in Zimbabwe and to unite opposition forces in that country to try and oust Mugabe. If the Zuma and Mantashe had then proceeded to discipline Vavi and if he was then suspended from the ANC, would we all be cheering this on as we are doing with the Malema case?

Surely ordinary ANC members (yes, also those who helped to get rid of Thabo Mbeki at Polokwane, ostensibly because of his dictatorial tendencies) should feel more than a bit uncomfortable by the manner in which Malema had been dealt with? I ask again: will there be other casualties and will the same principles be used to get rid of other opponents who do not shut up? Will they go after Matthews Phosa? Will they go after Kgalema Motlanthe if he ever grew a backbone and actually indicated that he was interested in presidency of the ANC? Will they go after our charming, but arch-opportunist, Tokyo Sexwale, for showing rather too much ambition?

And should this not all be read against the background of the pending suspension of a senior NPA prosecutor, reportedly because she refused to drop charges against crime intelligence boss Richard Mdluli who is said to enjoy protection from “right at the top”? Remember that last year a secret report prepared by Mduli was leaked to the newspaper and that this report claimed that various ANC leaders met in January 2010 in Estcourt, KwaZulu-Natal to plot the ouster of Jacob Zuma. (Why crime intelligence was involved in such a story is unclear as it is perfectly legal in a democracy for political contenders within a party to plot against each other – as long as they use only legal means.)

Key members of the group that is said to have met are KwaZulu-Natal provincial premier Zweli Mkhize and Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale.

Remember also that the Secrecy Bill has just as much if not more to do with attempts by the intelligence agencies (firmly under the control of Zuma and Mantashe) to protect their agents and to prevent any exposure of their – legal or illegal – activities which we now know (thanks to Mduli) also focus on the succession race inside the ANC.

It might be that Malema is a special case and that the extraordinary precedent set by this disciplinary case against Malema will not be used against other critics of the current ANC leadership or against anyone who dares to show any ambition to take over the job of President or Secretary General of the ANC. But do not count on it.

Source: Constitutionally Speaking

Criminal case against Malema, others for 'land grab'

Suspended ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema has been accused of stealing a prime piece of land in Polokwane, Limpopo in the suburb of Ster Park, police said on Sunday.

Brigadier Hangwani Mulaudzi said Polokwane police and the commercial crimes unit were investigating the case.

Businessman Matane Mphahlele has opened a criminal case against Malema, lawyer Maboku Mangena, Clifford Motsepe, the head of Limpopo's housing department, as well as senior municipal officers, City Press reported.

According to Mphahlele, Malema illegally transferred the plot into his own name in 2007 and resold it the following month for more than three times the price.

The newspaper further reported that Mangena and municipal officials allegedly helped Malema with the transfer. -- Sapa

Source: Mail & Guardian

ANC's resource nationalism

The ANC will push for a new interventionist economic nationalism, rather than a simplistic nationalisation of the country's $2.5-trillion in resources not yet mined, which was what ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema had wanted.

The Mail & Guardian has learned from various sources that central to this plan is to force competitive input prices through taxes and other penalties and for state institutions to take bigger stakes in companies that hold key strategic infrastructure minerals. Every producer or miner of critical feeder stocks that are used in manufacturing -- from steel, fertiliser, coal, platinum, polymers and copper to cement will be targeted for these types of intervention.

The radical proposals are contained in three discussion reports that the researchers handed to ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe and the head of the ANC economic transformation committee, Enoch Godongwana, two weeks ago. The documents are still to be debated and vetted by the ANC national executive committee before the party can showcase it at its policy conference in June next year.

The first discussion document deals with economic policy and globalisation; the second discusses how state-owned enterprises and development finance institutions can partner with savings industry funds for new infrastructure; and the third investigates nationalisation as an option for ways the state can intervene to benefit from mineral wealth.

Although resource nationalism is seen by some economists as a killer of investment, the ANC's research team that looked at the option indicates that state intervention in the minerals sector internationally is the norm rather than the exception. The team visited 13 countries around the globe as part of their research. Its idea is to use South Africa's resources sector to spur the creation of a thriving manufacturing industry that can drive growth and create jobs.

An option mooted is for state institutions and unions collectively to increase their shareholding in companies such as petrochemicals giant Sasol and steel conglomerate ArcelorMittal South Africa. The view is that these companies, which were once state entities, have strategic input assets that are used in manufacturing, but they are now engaging in predatory pricing and monopolistic activity that stifles competition and growth. "It's more about the alternatives to nationalisation and greater state intervention," Godongwana told the M&G this week. "The state needs to get a better share of these very high prices being charged."

The Public Investment Corporation, which has R1-trillion in assets, and the Industrial Development Corporation together own 26% of Sasol. The proposal is that union investment funds should be used to increase this stake to 51%. As controlling shareholders the state-cum-union would then be able to fix Sasol's prices at rates more beneficial to the economy.

To nationalise, on the other hand, would be highly expensive. Sasol, for example, could cost the state more than R50-billion and ArcelorMittal about R8-billion.

Some of the other options on the table in terms of state interventions on mineral assets are:

* An exports tax on raw minerals as an incentive for companies to beneficiate in South Africa and grow the country's manufacturing capacity. It is a more protectionist approach, one which many other countries have followed, especially in these uncertain economic conditions. But the export tax is exactly the same as the royalties tax, which is based on revenues. The suggestion then is for the royalties tax to be either adjusted or scrapped.

* A resources rent tax, similar to the Australian model, which is based on profits.

* All strategic minerals will have pricing conditions. There is a recommendation to amend the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act to give the minister power to attach conditions to existing and new licences that will force companies such as Sasol to charge a lower export parity-related price than downstream producers would pay in China, for example. These price conditions would have to be imposed by Sasol on their buyers to which they on-sell.

* Strengthen the Competition Act further to allow for stiffer penalties.

* Increase competition in sectors by bringing in an Asian competitor, for example, that will be partly funded by state institutions, such as the Industrial Development Corporation, to challenge monopolies. The same price conditions, however, will apply to the new player.

* Use electricity, rail and port tariffs to force monopolies to lower prices. One recommendation is that Eskom introduce a surcharge on electricity tariffs for Sasol, for example, as a way of disciplining the petrochemicals giant in terms of its higher prices.

* Instead of nationalising Kumba Iron Ore, a proposal is to introduce a user-pay concession on the rail link from its main Sishen mine in the Northern Cape to allow it to export more iron ore. Kumba could build and operate the line for about 15 years and then transfer it to Transnet.

* In the copper industry there are reserves for only another eight years. The state, through the Industrial Development Corporation, is already bidding to buy Rio Tinto's Phalaborwa Mining Company -- South Africa's only refined-copper producer -- which it could merge with state-owned Foskor.


Many of the proposals tie in with the government's broader goals to stimulate the country's industrial base as a way to meet the national growth path's target of five million jobs by 2020. But last weekend Mantashe sent the report on state interventions back to the drawing board, saying it needed to be rewritten in simpler language and case studies of other countries included.

Said Godongwana: "The report must capture the experiences of the 13 countries that were visited and reflect what is good and bad so that we can decide which lessons are useful for our own conditions. We need the best possible recommendations on how we can restructure the economy [to] make us more competitive."

But a number of ANC insiders led the M&G to believe that the report was sent back because it was too strongly against nationalisation and should eventually go down the "nationalisation-lite" route.

Peter Attard Montalto from research firm Nomura International said such interventions created only more investor uncertainty. "It has long been our view that the ANC would take a line of greater state control rather than nationalisation, but in the very long run it will lead us to the same place with the same cost as nationalisation."

Source: Mail & Guardian

South Africans Protest Over Hearing for Zuma Rival

The police in South Africa on Tuesday confronted crowds of angry demonstrators supporting Julius Malema, the firebrand leader of the governing party’s influential youth league, as he attended a disciplinary hearing that could sway both his own political career and that of President Jacob Zuma before party elections next year.

Under attack by Malema supporters burning the party flag and throwing rocks and bottles, the police fired stun grenades and water cannons outside the Johannesburg headquarters of the African National Congress, in power since the first post-apartheid elections in 1994.  Protesters chanting “Zuma must go!” also burned T-shirts and posters bearing the president’s portrait, according to Internet postings by South African news services in Johannesburg. The police erected razor wire barricades while a police helicopter hovered. At least one officer was wounded by a flying brick, a police spokesman said, and a South African news channel said one of its television crews was attacked near the party headquarters, Luthuli House.

The hearing on Tuesday came days after an elite South African police unit known as the Hawks said it was investigating Mr. Malema’s lucrative financial dealings, South African news reports said.  It was not immediately clear when the internal disciplinary panel conducting the hearing would announce its findings. But the A.N.C.’s secretary general, Gwede Mantashe, announced later in the day that it was moving the panel to an unspecified location outside Johannesburg because of the violence. The panel is to resume deliberations on Wednesday.

In a statement on its Web site, the A.N.C. also condemned the mayhem and blamed it on the leadership of the youth league. “It is our view that those who have taken the responsibility to mobilize the crowds to gather outside Luthuli House — the leadership of the A.N.C. Youth League — should also take full responsibility for the violence, criminality and ill discipline that has accompanied these crowds,” the statement said.

Mr. Malema, 30, and other members of the youth league were appearing before the panel to determine whether they should be expelled or suspended for bringing the party’s name into disrepute after calling for the overthrow of the government in neighboring Botswana and criticizing the party leadership. If Mr. Malema is exonerated, South African analysts said, he may feel emboldened to challenge Mr. Zuma, to whom he brought decisive support in a leadership battle in 2007. But if Mr. Malema is sidelined, the party may be able to pack the youth league leadership with loyalists likely to throw their weight behind Mr. Zuma, ensuring his re-election as A.N.C. leader.

Under party rules, its leader is also its presidential candidate, so, the analysts said, the fight with Mr. Malema could determine the country’s future leadership. Mr. Zuma is currently visiting Norway.
The dispute between the two men reaches deep into South Africa’s post-apartheid society. With calls to nationalize mines and banks and to seize white-owned farmland, Mr. Malema has caught the imagination of the country’s disaffected youth, telling them that they are missing out on the economic fruits of political freedom. Referring to Mr. Malema’s travails with his party, Reuters quoted him as saying on Monday: “If the A.N.C. defines your future as expulsion, we are ready for that. This does not delay our economic struggle,” he said. “We see this as a setback for the revolution we are pursuing. We will continue to push for economic freedom in our lifetime.”

The hearing on Tuesday was the second involving Mr. Malema this year. In May, he was fined and ordered to apologize for sowing discord within the party and undermining its leader’s authority.  On July 31, he publicly urged the ouster of President Seretse Khama Ian Khama of neighboring Botswana.

The episode was only one of many that have made Mr. Malema an irritant to the authorities as much as a champion among his more radical followers. While his statements have solidified his support, they have often troubled potential foreign investors and members of the country’s sizable white minority.
When he supported Mr. Zuma for the leadership of the party, Mr. Malema said he was ready to kill for him. He has called Helen Zille, the main opposition leader, a cockroach. While the South African government has professed neutrality in efforts to resolve the political and economic crises in neighboring Zimbabwe, Mr. Malema openly supported President Robert G. Mugabe. He once expelled a BBC correspondent from a news conference, saying he had “white tendencies.” Only months ago, Mr. Malema also stirred heated debate about the limits of freedom of expression and the definition of hate speech by singing a song from South Africa’s liberation struggle — “Shoot the Boer.” The word Boer is usually translated from Afrikaans as meaning white farmer but is sometimes used to refer to any white South African.

The party has shown increasing exasperation with him. Some of his statements last year prompted it to order him to attend anger-management classes. But party leaders rallied to Mr. Malema over his choice of songs, supporting his assertion that the “Shoot the Boer” refrain referred to the anti-apartheid struggle and did not represent a call for murder.

Source: New York Times

Journalists: Enemy of the people?

During his disciplinary hearing, Julius Malema's supporters ran riot outside at Luthuli House. But as soon as he began speaking to them afterwards, the young lions became as meek as lambs.

As demonstrators holding a T-shirt-burning vigil in support of embattled ANCYL leader Julius Malema became violent, a photographer was thrown out of Luthuli house and his camera smashed, rocks were thrown at journalists and e.tv's satellite vehicle was damaged.

When Malema exited Luthuli house in a black beret, even he had to urge his hundreds of supporters not to attack the media. "You cannot throw stones at journalists because journalists are just messengers ... if you attack journalists, you will lose public sympathy." Despite Malema's words, many reporters and photographers are beginning to feel that journalists are under siege. "The press has become the enemy," says the Star news photographer Chris Collingridge. He remembers when members of the media were welcome in townships and supported by the ANC. The ANC used us to tell their story during apartheid, he says.

The ANC's spokesperson, Jackson Mthembu, says he has not received a complaint about a man who had been thrown out of Luthuli House by officials and had his camera destroyed. But, he says, if such a thing had occurred, the ANC would not hesitate in condemning it. "The ANC had already condemned the violence of youth league supporters outside Luthuli house [on Tuesday]," adds Mthembu.

Consensus among photographers from some of South Africa's top newspapers is that attacks on journalists are becoming increasingly common. Raymond Louw, the acting chair for media freedom on the South African National Editor's Forum (Sanef), blames government ministers and the ruling party's antagonism towards the media for the growing tension between the public and the media. "Cabinet ministers frequently speak negatively about the media, makings accusations that are seldom proven," says Louw. "The government has created an environment in which demonstrators, who tend to be prone to violence, are more likely to turn against press photographers". Photographers are targeted more often because their camera identifies them -- although all journalists that can be identified are vulnerable, he adds.

The man whose camera was smashed when he was thrown out of ANC headquarters on Tuesday was roughed up by Luthuli House officials in front of journalists. Police chose not to get involved and pushed him away towards the guards, because they said he had been trespassing. An Eyewitness News journalist was called "bitch", Sapa photographer Werner Beukes was hit on the back of the head by a rock, and e.tv journalists were injured by rocks hurled at them by Malema supporters. Malema himself has at times shown little patience towards journalists, in one notable instance having the BBC's correspondent Jonah Fisher thrown out of a press conference, calling him "tjatjarag" and "you bloody agent".

On Monday, Times photographer Halden Krog was trying to take a photo of the only protester who had turned up at Luthuli house a day too early to show his support for Malema. He says was pushed by a man wearing ordinary clothes from Luthuli house, into the street and told him to, "Get the f*** off the site". He says he was even hassled when he went to the other side of the street.

In two incidents last week, press photographers were assaulted by members of the public, who tried to prevent them taking photographs. Beeld photographer Craig Nieuwenhuizen made headlines after a punch-up with security guard at Unisa campus in Pretoria while trying to report a story, and in a less-publicised incident in the Eastern Cape youths stoned a Daily Dispatch photographer who was trying to take photographs of young men running away from police following a protest at the Cathcart Magistrate's Court. Mail &Guardian photographer Lisa Skinner, who has been shot at by security guards, says she can count on one hand the number of photographers working in Johannesburg who have not had an incident where they have been physically prevented from doing their jobs. But more often than not, Skinner adds, it is the police or politician's bodyguards who stop them from taking pictures and assault photographers.

Experts say South African law allows photographers to document what is happening in public places. Photographers are usually prohibited from taking pictures of "national key points". A national key point is a government building, harbour or military installation that has been declared by the government to have a higher security clearance in order to protect national security. In short, photographers are legally permitted work in public places without permission.

Trespass laws and privacy laws would usually apply to the press, meaning that photographers would have to ask for permission to take pictures on private property. But sometimes photographers can take pictures on private property if it is in the public interest, media lawyer Dr Dario Milo told the M&G. Asked why the law which allows journalists to work in public places is increasingly ignored, Milo tells the M&G there is "a sad disconnect" between the law and practice: "There is more and more abuse of power".

Franz Krüger, the M&G's ombud and an adjunct professor at Wits University's journalism department, says that in many cases "the Constitution and law is often far ahead of popular sentiment".

There is huge hostility to the media in the ANC, and sometimes in the police, and at times it boils over into the street, he says, adding that Malema's supporters were probably angry with the media for reporting about his involvement with tenders, questions over his finances and the disciplinary charge he faces.

The ANC has been accused of trying to undermine the freedoms of the press with its push for the media to submit to outside regulation in the form of a media appeals tribunal. But the ANC's Mthembu says speculation that the ANC regards the media as its enemy is "hogwash". "The ANC are respectful to journalists. Many of our friends are journalists. There are even people at Luthuli house who started out as journalists."

Mthembu acknowledges there is disagreement over the need of a media appeals tribunal, but says this does not mean party members bear the media any ill will. "All we are calling for is recourse if journalists err," he says. "If I disagree with you about recourse for people who have fallen victim to the media does it mean I hate you?" asks Mthembu. "The ANC respects the right of journalists to do their jobs."

Elston Seppie, the president of the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI), says media houses are not doing enough to defend the right of journalists to report on the news, and should make a bigger issue about photographers being stopped from taking pictures. "I get the impression that newspaper owners or editors don't always take action against people who assault or prevent journalists from doing their jobs, other than writing a story on the incident," he says. Media owners must go to court more often to stand up against the treatment of press photographers or journalists will increasingly find it harder to do their job, Louw urges.

Krüger agrees that media houses have a responsibility to support their staff. "Photographers are very often on the front line and take risks for their employers" and media houses should look after them, he says. "The media will fight for everyone else but we don't fight for ourselves," laments Krog. But the Star's photographic editor Steve Lawrence says it can be frustrating to follow that path. After a photographer working with him had his equipment damaged a few years ago, he opened a case -- but it was buried. "Court cases just disappear," he says.

The people who should stop the harassment of photographers are the government, says Louw. "They started it," he says. "They can end it."

Source: Mail & Guardian

'ANC must adhere to the rules'

SENIOR advocate Patrick Mtshaulana says he will ensure that ANC disciplinary procedures are followed to the letter when he represents Julius Malema and Floyd Shivambu. Malema, who is the first accused, will appear today and Shivambu tomorrow to face charges of bringing the ANC into disrepute and sowing divisions within its membership.

Mtshaulana, a former uMkhonto weSizwe combatant, told Sowetan yesterday that he was drafted into the case late. Mtshaulana is a member of the Duma Nokwe group of advocates. The Sandton-based group of lawyers is named after the late Nokwe who was first African advocate of the Supreme Court of the Transvaal and an ANC stalwart.

"I am meeting Malema and Shivambu today. I have not held consultations yet. I am not sure whether I will also be representing all the other ANCYL members who have been charged," Mtshaulana. "I do not wish to comment further about the case except to say that we will assist in making sure that the disciplinary procedures are followed."

Source: The Sowetan

Give power back to the branch – Mantashe

African National Congress (ANC) branches must be allowed to think for themselves and leadership choices must not be dictated by a "well-resourced, narrow circle" of party members, ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe said on Tuesday. "Branches must be allowed to say 'that comrade did not do the work that he or she was given to do. Change that comrade'. And we are saying that culture must continue," he said at a media conference in Johannesburg.

The conference followed a four-day meeting of the ANC's national executive committee, which ended on Monday night. "But if we do what is called succession, you are actually killing the branches of the ANC. Branches of the ANC must be allowed to think and not be given a list of slates developed by a narrow, well-resourced circle in the ANC... That is a leadership responsibility; to liberate these branches from the vice of groupings that are intelligent, have the monopoly of wisdom, have resources, have a lot of cash-flow around elections... We must liberate the ANC from that."

He said nationalisation of the mines could not be used as a tool for punting leaders ahead of the next year's elective conference. "We must sustain nationalisation as a policy debate. You can't use a policy debate as a lobbying tool," he said.

The NEC met as the party's national officials – the top six leaders – brought disciplinary charges against ANC Youth League president Julius Malema and league spokesperson Floyd Shivambu. The charges related to comments critical of the Botswana government and about helping to strengthen opposition in that country.

Malema had said the league would support leaders, when the ANC went to its elective conference next year, who supported the league's economic programme including nationalisation of the mines and land reform without compensation.

Mantashe said the issues raised in the debate around nationalisation were pertinent, it was a "correct debate". "You can't use it as some mischievous tool of lobbying," he said. The debate had to be "anchored" in the content. The NEC re-affirmed its position on the so-called "succession debate" – that it was not yet opened for discussion. The ANC holds its next elective conference in December next year. The ANCYL and the Gauteng chapter of the party called for the opening of the debate on identifying the leadership to be elected at the conference in Mangaung.

Even some within the NEC wanted the leadership debate to be opened – Gauteng provincial chairperson, Paul Mashatile, made the call earlier this year. Malema, an ex-officio member of the NEC, also agitated for the opening of the debate at the league's own elective conference in June. "The fact that we had to remind the NEC of all the procedures, traditions and how these issues are handled in the ANC was informed by the observation that there was temptation in many structures of the ANC to jump the gun and start the nomination process today," Mantashe said.

He likened the ANC to an elephant – very slow, but very decisive when it started moving. "We reminded ourselves that we did take this decision and as members of the NEC there is an expectation that we must be loyal to our own decisions. That is part of that slow movement of an old organisation." The run-up to the Polokwane elective conference, during which President Jacob Zuma ousted former president Thabo Mbeki after a divisive leadership battle, was a "disaster", Mantashe said.

He said there would be no "silencing anybody" ahead of the 2012 conference. Lobbying should be done with respect. He was responding to questions on the disciplinary action taken against Malema. "So there is nothing political or silencing anybody. "Once you appreciate that election in 2012 is not a life and death issue for individuals, then you appreciate that there is a responsibility on this leadership to enforce discipline whether you are elected or not. "Whether you are liked or hated it doesn't matter, the organisation must not be allowed to collapse because you want to be popular and you want to be re-elected. It can't be allowed to happen... there is a term of five years, it ends in the 53rd national conference [2012]. "When we are told to stand off the stage, that is the end of our term. Before that any thing that happens, we are responsible. "Otherwise lobbying can be an open season of ill discipline, it cannot be allowed."

Mantashe described the meeting – which largely focused on discipline – as "candid and open". "That's why it took four days. It ended at 9 on Monday, day four. "We left that meeting understanding each other better."

Source: Polity

'We can't be seen to be weak': Mantashe takes aim at Malema

ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe launched a veiled attack on Julius Malema on Tuesday ahead of the ANC Youth League president's appearance before a disciplinary committee next week. At a press briefing at Luthuli House in Johannesburg following the ANC's special national executive committee (NEC) meeting at the weekend, Mantashe denounced the discipline problems besetting the party. "The NEC decried the crumbling of discipline in the ANC and it has emerged as a serious concern. Our failure to act on these issues will lose us the respect we enjoy in South Africa, the continent and the world," Mantashe said.

Malema, along with his spokesperson Floyd Shivambu, is due to appear before a party disciplinary hearing next week after being charged with misconduct last Friday for comments made on working towards regime change in Botswana. If found guilty, Malema faces being suspended from the party for up to five years, as he already has a suspended sentence against him following sanction last year. Mantashe's comments should come as no surprise as the youth league has been pushing for his ouster -- along with President Jacob Zuma -- at the ANC's next elective conference in Mangaung at the end of 2012.

Mantashe revealed that the NEC decided in its meeting to tackle unlawful business dealings within the ANC, saying it is part of their mandate as the ruling party to stamp out corruption. "It is our revolutionary duty to act against corruption and deal with it decisively -- we can't be seen to be weak," Mantashe said. This has been interpreted as a further stab at Malema, who is facing a flurry of investigations into his business dealings, with specific reference to the Ratanang trust registered in his name. The youth leader claims the trust is used to raise funds for charitable causes but is currently being probed by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela as well as the Hawks on allegations that he receives money through the trust for securing tenders in Limpopo.

Mantashe also attempted once more to quash the debate over who should lead the ANC after Mangaung, saying the discussion would commence at branch level once party leaders have given the process the green light. "The branches will have the opportunity to nominate their preferred candidates at an appropriate time [which] will be decided in due course," Mantashe said.

While not confirming disciplinary action would be taken against anybody discussing succession before the ANC officially declares it is safe to do so, Mantashe said debating the issue is a violation of the party's constitution. "The fact [that] we have to remind everyone is [due to] the temptation for members to jump the gun. We won't discuss leadership issues now and it would be deviant to do so," he said. This is a further swipe at Malema, who has been not only calling for Mantashe's head, but also began rallying support for Zuma to be replaced by Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe in Mangaung next year.

When quizzed by journalists about the specifics of the charges against Malema and the forthcoming disciplinary committee hearing, Mantashe would not be drawn into commenting, saying that doing so would prejudice the case. "The ANC will not comment on disciplinary procedures, so don't try to trick us into doing so," he said. Indications are that Malema will face a tough time in staving off disciplinary action, after the Mail & Guardian heard from party insiders that the youth league leader's support within the ANC is waning. The youth league is seeking a meeting with their mother body ahead of the scheduled hearing against their leader in the hopes that a political solution might be found to the situation.

If this does not result in a positive outcome from the league, ordinary youth league members confirmed to the M&G that a march is planned to ANC headquarters on the day of the hearing in a show of support of Malema. Mantashe confirmed the request of a meeting but would not comment on the possibility of it leading to the situation being defused before the hearing. "The process must be allowed to unfold and we will deal with any adventurous actions should they happen," he said.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Malema charged with fraud in tender saga

The Hawks confirmed that they were investigating African National Congress Youth League president Julius Malema for fraud and corruption, eNews reported on Saturday. "From the information that we have, we have enough to tell us that we need to do a full investigation ... there's a lot that tells us that we have reason to worry," Hawks spokesperson McIntosh Polela said.

The Hawks would examine the flow of money through companies linked to Malema, including the Ratanang family trust. Polela said the Hawks would need time to work through large amounts of electronic data linked to Malema's financial dealings and therefore could not say when the investigation would be completed.

ENews also reported that the South African Revenue Service (Sars) initiated its own investigation into Malema's financial affairs and alleged failure to pay tax. This came a day after the dates of the disciplinary hearings for both Malema and party spokesperson Floyd Shivambu were announced. "The dates that have been established ... are the 30 and 31 August, which we believe gives them adequate opportunity to prepare themselves for the case," ANC national disciplinary committee chairperson Derek Hanekom told eNews on Friday. Malema and Shivambu would be "charged individually". "Both ... have been charged with various violations of the ANC constitution, including bringing the ANC into disrepute through his utterances and statements on Botswana and sowing divisions in the ranks of the African National Congress."

Malema recently said the league would send a team to Botswana to consolidate local opposition parties and help bring about regime change. It believed the government there was "in full cooperation with imperialists" and undermining the "African agenda". The ANC publicly rebuked the league and the league in turn said it did not believe it was in the wrong or going against ANC policy. It expressed disappointment at being publicly rebuked before the matter had been internally discussed.

Source: Mail & Guardian

A.N.C.’s Youth League Issues Apology

The Youth League of the governing party in South Africa apologized Saturday to the bloc’s leadership for comments in which it called for the ouster of Botswana’s democratically elected government.

The governing party, the African National Congress, publicly criticized the Youth League and its leader, Julius Malema, this month for the remarks. A party spokesman, Jackson Mthembu, told eNews Channel that its leaders would discuss the matter but would not say whether Mr. Malema would be disciplined.

The Youth League said in a statement that it “has never, and will never, define itself outside the policy confines and directives of the A.N.C., and will whenever expected be available to listen to political and organizational guidance from the leadership.”

Mr. Malema has already been a thorn in the side for the party over his racially divisive comments and repeated calls for the nationalization of mines in South Africa, a major supplier of platinum, gold and diamonds. But he also holds a significant populist appeal for much of South Africa’s black population, and senior party leadership has often turned to courting him publicly.

Source: New York Times

According to Transparency International, Botswana is the least corrupt country in Africa and ranks similarly close to Portugal and South Korea.