FEEDS |

Paranoia and paybacks rule

We need a government that is loyal to the Constitution

Oct 25, 2009 10:47 PM | By Justice Malala

Justice Malala: In the final analysis, President Jacob Zuma was saved, and handed the presidency of the Republic of South Africa, by members of the intelligence services. The man who had spent his whole life at the centre of ANC intelligence structures was handed the combination to the Union Buildings by his supporters in the National Intelligence Agency.


Current Font Size:
quote Zuma was always going to reward his loyalists quote

Remember that, just before the elections this year, Zuma's lawyers handed the National Prosecuting Authority evidence of collusion between its former officials and former president Thabo Mbeki's supporters.

The evidence - recordings of tapped phone conversations between former Scorpions boss Leonard McCarthy and former NPA head Bulelani Ngcuka, among others - was part of the representations made by Zuma's lawyers in applying for his corruption case to be dropped.

The charges against Zuma - irrespective of whether he had acted corruptly and influenced decisions about procuring arms for South Africa - were the one cloud still hanging over him as he sprinted towards the presidency.

His rape trial was a distant memory.

The stories about him being handed pocket money by Schabir Shaik were not worth a mention.

But, with only a month to go to the election, the corruption allegations remained. They would have stuck with him throughout his presidency: the image of a sitting president arriving at court on corruption charges flashed through many a citizen's mind. It was a sobering thought.

With emergence of the Ngcuka tapes, the cloud was somewhat dissipated. In its place, the idea of Zuma being a victim of former president Thabo Mbeki was cemented.

It should come as no surprise, therefore, that Zuma has systematically appointed former members of the intelligence agencies, and his comrades in the ANC underground, to strategic positions in his administration. In essence, Zuma the spy remains a spy, and only trusts those who are practitioners of the dark arts of espionage.

But is this good for our country and our democracy? I doubt it.

Zuma has appointed Bheki Cele to lead the police. Cele is an old comrade of Zuma's who served with him in ANC intelligence. Despite having served as safety and security MEC in KwaZulu-Natal for eight years, Cele has already ably demonstrated in the past few weeks that he is patently not the right man for the job. Anyone who believes that police brutality sanctioned by the state will curb crime, is delusional. Olga Kekana, brutally shot and killed by the police last weekend, will forever be the finger pointing at Cele and Zuma.

What South Africa desperately needs is increased police efficiency and less corruption. Shooting young people because they might be reaching for their seat belts is hardly the solution.

But Cele is the police commissioner we have to live with.

The appointment of Moe Shaik - a Zuma factionalist who was humiliated at the Hefer Commission - as the new head of the Secret Services illustrates Zuma's failure to appreciate the sensitivities of his role as president.

Many of us understand that Zuma would reward his loyalists. But appointing a man at the centre of the divisions in the intelligence services - a man whom many justifiably fear will now embark on a mission to wipe out perceived enemies - is so misguided that it boggles the mind.

There are many other signs of the paranoid hand of intelligence structures in Zuma's appointments. Our new defence minister, Lindiwe Sisulu, (minister of intelligence from 2001 until April 2004) was in danger of being abducted by striking soldiers, it has recently been claimed in court papers by the army. This is typical of the paranoia that infuses our, and many other intelligence agencies. Why would they want to abduct her?

And it is not just the intelligence agencies that we should worry about. It is the infusion of the kind of thinking that would have every institution packed with "the loyal". Why should the judiciary, or the Judicial Services Commission, be filled with "the loyal"? Loyal to whom - to those who believe they exist to protect Zuma?

What we don't need , and what Zuma should guard against , is entrenching a state machinery that is loyal to one or other faction of the ruling party. What South Africa needs is a government whose loyalty is to the Constitution. Such cadres, such loyalties, will protect whomever comes to power.

 Loading...

 or  to comment

Comments

Oct 26 2009 02:49:39 AM
tpm
user name
Well put!
Oct 26 2009 05:26:54 AM
Truth still
user name
I was once hopeful that the ANC would be the one exception in Africa. My father said I was a fool, he was right. We continue our inevitable march to Mugabeland - undermine the courts and put your cronies in positions of power in intelligence, military, police and you have it all.
Oct 26 2009 05:36:24 AM
Iamgone
user name
I always got shivers when I thought about Zuma being SA's president. I believe that in a few years people will pray for "apartheid" (white rule)to return, but it will never.
Our own brothers will be our biggest problem. They will continue to rob and steal and kill anyone who comes in their way. SA will be a land for the strong and well connected. They will fly out to europe and asia for medical treatment with SA's hospitals in ruins. Good food will only be for the rich.
Oct 26 2009 05:51:09 AM
Iamgone
user name
Oct 26 2009 06:33:28 AM
ZENETH
user name
I don't think there is a President who has flooded the security and intelligence portfolios with just ANY competent but untrustworthy individuals.
Oct 26 2009 07:37:34 AM
v3
user name
At the risk of rehashing "Animal Farm" the ANC become more and more like the Nats all the time.

Except that instead of "Reds under the beds" we have "under the Red beds"

What this faction fighting has to do with the ANC election promises, with the national interest, with the needs of the poorest of the poor or with improving service delivery and fighting corruption (against it, not for it, that is) only Jesus can explain when he returns
Oct 26 2009 07:44:07 AM
Eric
user name
Good one, Justice!
Oct 26 2009 07:57:49 AM
PuritanGenes
user name
Apparently, according to Malala, asking the police to shoot first when they have guns pointed at them amount to police brutality. In spite of the very high number of police deaths in SA. Seemingly, it's quite acceptable for police to die at the rate at which they do here.

We need to change the equation, criminals need to have mortal fear for the police, period. This does not amount to a sanctioning of police brutality, ongoing confusion over the issue does us no favours. And of course mistakes and abuses will happen, when they do, action should be taken against the police members responsible.
Oct 26 2009 08:01:22 AM
saduf
user name
Justice, again wait until this criminal break into your home, rape you family the shoot you. then you will understand that crime in South Africa is not the same as in UK.

Lack of corruption will not stop these criminals from killing or robbing innocent citizens.

We had your proposed methods of crime fighting through out Mbeki's era and things just got worse.So wake-up. this is SA, criminals kill you for ur cell phone , so who should shoot at them? you or the police,
Oct 26 2009 08:11:13 AM
webathandwa
user name
Justice is prone to making unsubstantiated and illogical sweeping statements. Which President will employ just any 'competent' angel for such portfolios?


Today's Topics