When ANC officials who had opposed President Jacob Zuma’s Cabinet reshuffle made their dramatic about-turn on April 5, secretary-general Gwede Mantashe said the party’s MPs would oppose the motion of no confidence in the president. In his media briefing, Mantashe said "no army general can allow his forces to be commanded by the enemy forces". He made it clear that "No ANC member will vote in a motion of the opposition".
These statements were a clear reaction to the statement made by the fired finance minister, Pravin Gordhan, who, shortly after being axed, said he would vote his conscience in a vote of no confidence. That vote is now set for April 18.
Opposition party leaders had also said they had been contacted by ANC MPs who were considering doing the same. Mantashe clearly wanted to nip all such intentions in the bud.
There are two aspects of Mantashe’s remarks that are disconcerting, and invite comment. The first is that he uses a war metaphor to stop ANC MPs acting on their moral convictions. Comparing party politics to warfare is inappropriate. There is no doubt that there is a lot of competition and verbal skirmishes between rival parties, but this still does not make politics the same as war.
Politics in a constitutional democracy is about winning the support of citizens for your political vision and policies. The only power appropriate in a democratic dispensation is the power of persuasion.
Political parties have the right to persuade citizens, and even political opponents, that their vision and policies are best for the country. To equate politics with war, and to appeal to tactics relevant only in armed conflict, is inappropriate.
Even if politics could be likened to war, the ANC would still have been wrong to call on its members to ignore their moral instincts. This was clearly illustrated in both Nazi Germany and apartheid SA, where people involved in atrocities tried to defend their immoral conduct, by claiming they were simply obeying the orders of their military commanders. In both cases, such a justification of unethical conduct was found wanting. Even in war, ethics apply.
Both in politics and war, people cannot simply switch off their conscience. Should they do so, history will not judge them kindly.
The second disconcerting aspect is that Mantashe implies obedience to the ANC and its command structure over-rides the moral conscience of its MPs. The highest loyalty of the president of the country, and of all MPs, should be to the Constitution of SA. In fact, that is what the President, his Cabinet and MPs all have pledged when they took their Oath of Office.
To call on ANC MPs to put their loyalty to their party before all other considerations, constitutes, in my mind, a breach of their oath of office. Should there be a conflict between loyalty to one’s political party and loyalty to our Constitution, the latter should always prevail.
In Article 1 of the Constitution, the core values underpinning the Constitution are clearly articulated. These include "supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law" and a "democratic government, to ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness". It can be argued that the motion of no confidence will be served before Parliament because the president failed to uphold these values.
After the Constitutional Court finding on Nkandla in 2016, a motion of no confidence was brought before Parliament because opposition parties were convinced the president was in breach of his oath of office and did not respect the supremacy of the Constitution. Although that motion was defeated, the president’s lack of respect for the Constitution and his oath of office remains a consideration in the current motion.
The way in which Zuma reshuffled his Cabinet also raises serious concern about his commitment to govern SA according to the constitutional values of accountability, responsiveness and openness. Although he has the constitutional prerogative to compile the Cabinet as he deems fit, it does not excuse him from his duty to govern the country in a manner that is accountable, responsive and open.
Zuma kept his own party, and the country at large, in the dark for days, which sparked uncertainty and speculation that ultimately contributed to our economy being embarrassingly diminished to junk status. Also in this regard, a case can be made that the president disrespects his oath of office and the Constitution.
Our Constitution gives MPs the duty to remove the president when he is in breach of his oath of office or the Constitution. As MPs, they are expected to be true to their own oaths of office and to protect the Constitution. It is thus clear that ANC MPs cannot be forbidden to vote their conscience on the no-confidence motion. The issue is rather whether they will have the moral conviction and courage to do so.
• Rossouw is CEO of The Ethics Institute
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.