By Moepeng Valencia Talane
Politics is the gift that keeps giving, at least for the sake of a robust news cycle and every journalist interested in South Africa’s current affairs. This year, certainly after the May elections that brought about big changes in the dynamic in government and in Parliament, we are not short of dramatic developments in the political space.
That drama ranges from the announcement of a multi-party government and the leadership shakeups in the EFF and the MK Party following the departure of Floyd Shivambu from the former to join the latter, to the controversies surrounding the DA’s decision to include and keep morally compromised MPs, and now the entrance of three state capture-accused former heads of parastatals into Parliament.
In a nutshell, the seventh Parliament as a mixed bag of the good, the bad, and the contemptible, means that none of the large parties can claim to hold the standard for an absolutely clean representation (by MPs) on moral grounds. And because of this, the failing confidence in democratic institutions is neither surprising nor unwarranted.
Brian Molefe, Lucky Montana, and Siyabonga Gama were all implicated in the state capture commission’s report for a variety of governance-related irregularities pertaining to their terms at three of the country’s largest SOEs in the period between the early 2010s to around 2018. The commission recommended that law enforcement agencies investigate them further – indeed in the case of Molefe and Gama, corruption charges were laid in relation to Transnet’s 2015 locomotives procurement project. Nevertheless, they now make up part of the MK’s representation in the National Assembly, at the expense of several of their colleagues who were removed from their MP positions. Some of the latter have now taken MK to court to fight for their reinstatement.
The trio join a cohort of lawmakers on whom ordinary South Africans rely to direct the country at a difficult time in its existence, and to hold the executive leadership of government to account while also applying themselves to the strengthening of public institutions that deliver services to South Africans.
Quality leadership required
Parliament is also a mechanism through which the correct anti-corruption tone is set to guide how well government does in fighting corruption within its structures. The professionalisation programme that has characterised the previous administration is key to this fight, and the institutions that have been established to help ensure it, such as the NACAC for example, will no doubt have at some point to present to Parliament their strategies for turning the tide against corruption in a sustainable way.
On the other hand, the very judiciary that impeached John Hlophe from his position on the bench will be subjected to him partaking in the appointment of judges in October, and the only thing standing between that reality and now is how the Western Cape High Court will rule on the application opposing his appointment to the Judicial Service Commission.
By the same token, state capture implicated MPs will sit in committees that have similar significance on how leaders of public institutions are appointed and held accountable.
During the tenure of the state capture commission, Corruption Watch made a submission that the organisation hoped would help steer a national conversation around leadership appointments in strategic public institutions of oversight. It placed emphasis on the quality of leadership appointed to anti-corruption and anti-crime institutions, and the role that Parliament should play in setting the standards for these appointments. The very notion of corruption-accused or -implicated individuals ultimately having a say in who gets appointed in these positions is worrying.
Good governance and integrity
This is part of the reason why not everyone is happy with the inclusion of the three men in the legislature, and the general argument holds merit: Parliament is the quintessence of good governance and integrity as provided for in our Constitution. The buck stops there as far as our government’s competence in recruiting deserving, competent, ethical civil servants as well as maintaining an efficient public service of the same standard are concerned.
Our constitutional democracy makes every effort to distinguish the characteristics of our leaders along the lines of good ethics and honest devotion to upholding values that grow and better the nation’s sense of existence.
Alas, it also does not restrict people accused of breaking the law from becoming members, but it places an obligation that an individual wishing to take the oath of Parliament be worthy of that stature and be willing to wholeheartedly and genuinely represent the portion of the electorate that voted to place them there.
Furthermore, the Constitution was written with an idealistic notion of parliamentarians as leaders who embody above-standard values and work hard to build the best country of people who believe in their leadership and abilities. Certainly, these former heads of parastatals do not enjoy the confidence of all South Africans as MPs. One may even argue that they do not necessarily enjoy the confidence of their own party’s supporters, having not been on the parliamentary list that informed the MK’s votes.
But the former ruling party of the ANC was punished this year by voters in a long-overdue indictment, and it was partly for its failure to hold its own accountable in the midst of many governance failings across government. Frankly, some of the individuals that we reasonably expected the party to remove from positions of power for failing its constituents are today in Parliament. The likes of Malusi Gigaba, David Mahlobo, and Supra Mahumapelo are also directly and indirectly implicated in state capture, but made it onto their party list despite public misgivings on their complicity.
Again, some have argued that our Constitution did not provide for the possibility of major character flaws that could end up detrimental to the most ordinary South African, such as corruption-tainted leaders of the party chairing portfolio committees that make major decisions about government work.
So in condemning the MK for sending the state capture-accused trio to Parliament, we should also consider the broader picture. That there are no holy cows. If anything, power-hungry politicians will always put themselves first, so we might just see more of the musical chairs and public mudslinging of the past few weeks.
Having said that, then, it becomes tricky to fault a political party with a presence in the legislature for ushering in representatives who are compromised. It is merely playing the political game that has been played by others before it, for years, only by different rules.
