The Zondo commission of inquiry into state capture has cast an unflattering light on the ANC's policy of "cadre deployment", and raises the question whether it is consistent with the demands for openness and accountability at the heart of our democratic, constitutional order. On the evidence thus far, it's obvious that deploying party hacks to positions of power has backfired spectacularly, and the people of SA are all the poorer for it.
Three years ago, former president Jacob Zuma neatly set out how he, and presumably many of his fellow comrades, viewed relations between party and state when he said: "I argued one time with someone who said the country comes first, and I said as much as I understand that I think my organisation, the ANC, comes first."
It was precisely this kind of party-first thinking that former public enterprises minister Barbara Hogan laid bare at the Zondo commission this week, and in doing so drew the party deeper into the mire. Hogan painted a dramatic and troubling picture of party leaders interfering willy-nilly in the minutiae of complex matters such as what trains Transnet would spend billions on. Trains that all South Africans were paying for.
Worse still, though, is the suggestion that such interference was anything but a well-meant attempt by amateurs to fiddle in matters beyond their knowledge and training. In fact, the interference clearly had as its intention putting the interests of a well-connected party elite and an immigrant family, the Guptas, above those of all South Africans.
Hogan testified that after being appointed public enterprises minister in 2009, she had an encounter with Zuma that shocked her. He seemed intent on having Siyabonga Gama appointed CEO of Transnet, despite her having warned that Gama faced an internal audit and disciplinary action at Transnet, where he had headed the freight rail division.
Gama got the job, and was suspended last month over allegations of misconduct and maladministration involving a R54bn locomotive-acquisition deal.
According to leaked Gupta e-mails, two months before his appointment, Gama enjoyed a two-night stay at the five-star Oberoi hotel in Dubai, a favourite haunt of the Guptas and their state-capture cronies.
Nor was the indecent haste to appoint Gama limited to Zuma, who presumably knew which candidate would best further the Guptas' interests. Not far behind was the ANC's then secretary-general Gwede Mantashe, who described Gama as "an African manager with capabilities".
But wasn't Sipho Maseko, now head of Telkom and who was also available for the job but had been blocked by Hogan's predecessor at public enterprises, Brigitte Mabandla, not also "an African manager with capabilities"?
The flip side of this thinking was the insinuation that Hogan, by not falling in with the whims of the party bosses, was made to feel that she was anti-transformation, although clearly Zuma and his cohorts had motivations that went beyond race alone.
There is no government that doesn't insist on its leaders occupying their country's top political posts. And perhaps it is understandable that the most senior bureaucrats are at the very least comfortable with implementing the party's policies, in a broad sense.
But when it comes to demanding managerial and technocratic jobs, surely skills and aptitude are the qualities one should be looking for?
The ANC has insisted that it is not on trial in the Zondo inquiry. Increasingly, though, that is not the case. As the inquiry unfolds, not only will the ANC have to make a clean breast of its involvement in state capture, but will have to re-examine cadre deployment.
In responsible hands it is a policy that, at best, sits uncomfortably alongside the demands of public accountability. In the hands of the reckless and the avaricious, it is a minefield fraught with dangers of favouritism and self-enrichment.
Isn't it time the ANC took a hard look at itself and asked whether its policies are in the interests of all South Africans? On the evidence so far, it appears party trumps people...