EDITORIAL | If Cyril can’t say why cadre deployment failed, how can we trust him to fix it?

Quite a lot rested on the appearance of President Cyril Ramaphosa before the state capture commission on Wednesday.

It was, in many ways, an appearance laden with concerning and encouraging symbols. It communicated that the country’s first citizen has a healthy and by all means welcome relationship with the law, accountability and a need to assist in finding solutions to SA’s many intractable problems. 

Ramaphosa’s appearance also came as the country awaited a decision by the Constitutional Court on whether former president Jacob Zuma should be imprisoned for his decision not to appear before the commission, headed by deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo.

It is significant that Ramaphosa is willing to face the commission and answer questions about what he knew about state capture taking root at a time he was the country’s deputy president (and also in his capacity as ANC president), while Zuma, who was in charge, simply eschews accountability. 

Ramaphosa’s appearance and questioning sent a message that his position will not secure him an easy passage.

He put up a spirited defence of the ANC’s deployment committee, indicating, correctly, that many ruling parties around the world have formal or informal deployment structures. But the nub, it turned out, was in the detail.

If we don’t want to see the same thing happen to state-owned companies, we’ve got to identify what caused these problems and seek to ensure that we recommend measures that will make sure that the same things don’t happen.

—  Deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo

Zondo indicated to Ramaphosa that the country’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs) were reduced to cesspits of corruption and yet they were supposedly led by deployed, capable cadres. 

As Zondo put it: “Who are the people who have been making these appointments? If we don’t want to see the same thing happen to state-owned companies, we’ve got to identify what caused these problems and seek to ensure that we recommend measures that will make sure that the same things don’t happen.” 

Ramaphosa’s response, unfortunately, came short.

“What I can say is that there was massive system failure. There were certain people put in certain positions to advance certain agendas. Some of it was so hidden, so masked that you could not see that these individuals were pursuing an agenda. That is why we rely on your commission ... ”

Ramaphosa, however, proffered nice-sounding phrases, such as that the country was emerging from “a horrible past” that destroyed these SOEs, but now “want to populate not only the boards, but management (of SOEs), with people who are capable, who are focused. We are already beginning to see this.”

We believe Zondo was correct to tell the president that acknowledgment of shortcomings is woefully insufficient if we are to carve a new path for our country.

“I would such as you to identify the actual areas where you say, as a party, we have done our homework, we believe this is where we didn’t do what we were supposed to do. This is where we did something we shouldn’t have done.” 

While the commission stayed clear of more controversial issues on Ramaphosa’s day one, his questioning indicated the president may need to prepare himself for tough times on the stand. This is necessary to send a message that one’s standing in society provides no shield from accountability. It may also prove a lie to the claim that the commission, established by Zuma, was targeted at an anti-Ramaphosa faction of the ANC.

In the end, though, the sad reality is that while the ANC defends its deployment committee, the abuse of this committee and its appointment of underqualified people cost the ANC in more ways than one. 

Underqualified people are not just clueless at work, they invariably underperform. Communities don’t get services. The deployed cadres can’t be disciplined because they’re beholden and thus accountable to an invisible group rather than the appointing authority. In the end, communities starved of delivery not only complain to no end, they become despondent and join rival parties, or decide to boycott electoral processes completely.

This failure does not only affect the ANC, but our democracy.

Ramaphosa may be correct that the ANC, such as other ruling parties, has a right to deploy its cadres. But if he, as asked by Zondo, doesn’t yet know how the deployment committee facilitated or was complicit in state capture, how then can he and the ANC assure the country that such complicity will not be revisited upon the weary and service delivery-starved people of this country?