Ayi Kwei Armah’s The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born’s social realist fiction depicts a protagonist known as “the man” who refuses to indulge in corruption in Ghana. Everyone else around him had succumbed to greed and rot following the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s first president. The protagonist (the man) strives to remain focused, clean and innocent in a country characterized by, gluttony, rot or corruption. Corruption and greed are the central themes of Armahs’s book. This cancer(s) was eating away the fibre of the Ghanaian society between 1965's Passion Week and February 25, 1966. Accordingly, the man was trying to deconstruct and comprehend the reality of post-independence in his country owing to the debilitating sway corruption had on Ghana.

The novel highlights the frustration many societies have had to contend with in Africa after achieving political independence. The two fundamental questions that need to be posed and honestly responded to are: Is South Africa’s contemporary state a carbon copy of Ayi Kwei Armah’s The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born? How far apart or closer is South Africa’s anatomy to Ayi Kwei Armah’s The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born?

The notion of corruption could be open to different interpretation. It could be (mis)read as a trope for a society that legitimises sheer public robbery. Such an idea is tellingly expressed by the current state of South African society. The elephant in the room is venality, instant gratification and conspicuous consumption. It is a cancerous disease to the stability of social fibre. It disturbs the stability of the socio-political calculus. It is, in some instances, performed in labyrinthine ways. It stiffens the sinews of the nation’s archetype and backbone. It fertilises the state of false consciousness and deforms the nature of social being. It creates a possibility for helplessness, vulnerability and hopelessness. In such an environment, indecorous demeanour defines the nature, seriousness, emptiness and warped missive directed at reasonable people. Corruption is a phenomenon that flouts openness, accountability, responsibility and governance. In this context, one is less sanguine about its impact.

Corruption, at its wickedest, represents circumstantial temptations and personification of venality. It provides an epic moment of group morality and group think devoid of integrity and sincerity. It is a touchstone of venality, vice and has become a byword for deception. Indeed, it is a testimonial betrayal of democratic governance, lawfulness, openness, transparency and values humankind holds dear.

On a more prosaic note, corruption could trigger political and economic volatility. Corruption has robbed of a cardinal element of legitimacy. It can lead to widespread social unrest and discourage foreign direct investment. Menacingly, it facilitates the pilfering of financial resources from the downtrodden to the pockets of the political leadership. It breeds more terrestrial omnivorous and carnivorous animals. It is lamentable that infrastructure from the erstwhile homeland system was not reconfigured to address the challenges of the democratic moment. The system of separate development characterised by the homeland system was in keeping with sustaining the divisive apartheid juggernaut. There were belongings that deserved to be done away with. Other programmes could have been refocused or remodelled in sync with the central challenges of the moment.

On the negative, an objective observation (in the post-apartheid system) of the degradation and dilapidation of former capital cities such as Mmabatho, Bisho, Umtata, Giyani, Thohoyandou, Lebowakomo, Kangwane amongst others leaves a lump in the throat. For instance, Dr Mamphela Ramphele, at the launch of Round 2 of the Open Society Monitoring Index said that “many of the contracts were secured by companies experienced in the art of lubricating tender processes”. This is one of the pervasive public corruptions. It is in this context that Paul Maylam contend that the “stress on the discontinuity between the segregation era and apartheid is part of the South African liberal mythology”. Compounding that, corruption has become a magnet for quick rich schemes for entrepreneurs thus becoming an acceptable part of the South African liberal mythology. South Africa may soon gain notoriety as a mafia state where corruption has been institutionalised. Taken further, the Arab Spring that played itself out in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya may even gravitate its way onto South Africa. That would be the mark of South Africa’s folklore. That would be the bane of corruption on the soul and reputation of the country. It militates against the national economic interest to remove binding constraints on sustainable socio-economic development.

The phenomenon of corruption does not create a possibility to improve policy certainty and predictability. It is by far one of the institutional hurdles in socio-economic transformation. The release of the Corruption Watch report on corruption within the Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department (JMPD) highlights the cancer of corruption and corrosion that has been left unhindered. Unsurprisingly, the rating agency Standard and Poor’s has relegated South Africa’s credit rating outlook thus hitting hard at the citizens in a rapidly evolving global society.

On the positive, an active, knowledgeable and engaging citizenship call for ethical and responsible leadership for the sustenance of constitutional democracy. The orientation, consciousness and paradigm of thinking of citizens determine the altitude or legitimacy of human development at the centre of societal discourse. Misguided populism and vague notions of liberation will not help in the realisation of the material conditions and maturity of political economy and business. Without any doubt, these are some of the issues that Michela Wrong warned about in her profound magnum opus It is our Turn to Eat: The Story of a Kenyan Whistle-Blower. John Githongo’s determination to root out corruption in Kenya without warming up to ethnic affinity helped to restore, decorum, credibility and dignity of government’s commitment to good governance. Further, the Presidential Infrastructure Coordination Commission (PICC) through Government recently adopted an Infrastructure Plan intended to transform the economic landscape of South Africa and strengthen the delivery of basic services to the people. The realisation of projected economic growth and areas of the country based on the myriad Strategic Integrated Projects (SIPs) offers policy makers, organised labour and business leaders the fulcrum to increased integration into the world economy.

This, for instance, supports the World Economic Forum 2011–2012 The Global Competitiveness Report’s recognition of the qualitative as well as the quantitative aspects of growth, integrating such concepts as inclusiveness and environmental sustainability to provide a fuller picture of what is needed and what works. In quintessence, this provides primary thoughts on how to understand and measure value through investor confidence by defining sustainable competitiveness in socio-economic, geo-political, social and environmental terms. These constitute the job drivers and enablers that could create a virtuous circle for inclusiveness, competitiveness and improved economic growth. It is not about bucking up at a wrong tree that does not even have fruits. It is about contributing towards the founding of a national consensus through the integration, co-ordination and alignment of sectoral strategies against corruption.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, US Secretary of State remarked at Transparency International-USA's Annual Integrity Award Dinner on 22 March 2012 that there are many dedicated people who serve by waking up every single morning trying to figure out what more we can do to reduce corruption, to create transparency, accountability, and better governance. She added that these people never receive awards and their names are not likely to be known. But they are fighting the fight day in and day out.

Undoubtedly, Clinton’s reflection on the people’s fight is the personification of Ayi Kwei Armah’s The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born’s protagonist (the man) who strives to remain attentive, unsoiled and guiltless in a country characterized by voraciousness, rot or corruption. It is by far not a representation of the icon of purity and limpidness. Meaning-making, modernity and plenitude of material goods must not, as Norma Romm correctly intimated, “merely amount to whimsical fantasizing of future possibilities”.

The central lessons for South Africa’s experience is that it is about time we get our priorities right. This is proceeding from the premise that we must get back to basics in the improvement of the human condition and development. It is principally about contributing towards the establishment of a national consensus through the integration, co-ordination and alignment of sectoral orientations or strategies against corruption. This will have to include strategic orientation for the separation between state and party thus ushering in active, knowledgeable and engaging citizenship. That is crucial to a society’s welfare and soundness. That is, we need to avoid the collective underestimation of the critical work needed to cure the socio-political schizophrenia that blights the competitiveness and growth of the country. We all are integral parts of a bigger stake in society and inextricably linked to the South African liberal mythology. We must not be caught eating forbidden fruits or securing our livelihoods by “lubricating tender processes.” This will usher in a new possibility of experience where greediness and putrefaction are left far behind and tranquillity or innocence is the watchword.

Ultimately, corruption shall not become a timeless phenomenon!

REFERENCES

1. Ayi Kwei Armah. 1968. The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born. Heinemann: Johannesburg
2. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Remarks at the Transparency International-USA's Annual Integrity Award Dinner. The Mayflower Hotel. Washington, DC. March 22, 2012
3. Mamphela Ramphele. Address at the launch of Round 2 of the Open Society Monitoring Index. 16 April 2012
4. Michela Wrong. 2009. It's Our Turn to Eat: The Story of a Kenyan Whistle-Blower
5. Norma Romm. 1990. Berger’s conception of development: a humanist argument. This is a chapter in Cornie Alant’s edited book Sociology and Society. A Humanist Profile. Pretoria: University of South Africa
6. Paul Maylam. Explaining the Apartheid City: 20 Years of South African Urban Historiography. Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol 21, No1. March 1995
7. World Economic Forum. The Global Competitiveness Report. 2011-2012. Geneva, Switzerland 2011

Dr Reuel Khoza, Nedbank’s Non-Executive Chairman and Mr Garth Griffin Absa's Group Chairman have proffered profound statements on their respective institutions annual reports. Dr Khoza and Mr Griffin’s acerbic comments (re)traces ten notable issues: National Development Plan (NDP), international outlook, leadership, ethics and governance, stakeholder engagement, regulatory and risk environment, respect for the supremacy of the Constitution, job creation, partnership, and morality. There can be no doubt, whatever the concerns, that Nedbank and Absa are corporate citizens within the country’s system of social compact and partnership.

It is however lamentable that the political and government’s reaction to their statements did not embrace the commentary with humility and modesty. In a sense, this must be predicated on the appreciation that citizens have a constitutional right to express worldviews on varieties of issues. To be fair, this includes, but not limited to issues that political parties, business, civil society and government agree with. The objective reality though is that some sectors of our society took umbrage to the reasonable statements tendered by Dr Khoza. These sectors rather than engaging with the substance, found it convenient to go for the jugular. What is profoundly disturbing is that it became clear when Gwede Mantashe confidently manufactured one scarecrow alleging that Dr Reuel Khoza is covering up for his own failures like twice failing to sell Nedbank as mandated by the shareholder, Old Mutual.

This urban legend was supported by Nathi Mthethwa, Minister of Police and African National Congress (ANC) National Executive (NEC) Member, Blade Nzimande, Minister of Higher Education and Training and General Secretary of the South African Communist Party (SACP) and Jimmy Manyi, Cabinet Spokesperson and Chief Executive Officer of the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS). The bricks they threw at Dr Khoza and the quality of reaction they acquiesced became patently clear that they have not read and understood the statements inherent in the annual report(s).

It could be argued that the quartet have found it apposite, relevant and reasonably expedient to bully and cajole citizens into submission. The battle of ideas is being institutionally criminalised. This is a reflection of immaturity, delinquency, sluggishness and childishness on the part of the quartet. The messages inherent in what they submit are devoid of substance, thoughtfulness, appropriateness and relevance. It is clear that they neither absorbed nor internalised the contemporary meaning of Khoza’s statements. The guillotine that has been placed on the head of Khoza confirms the blurring of the state and party in a constitutional democracy such as South Africa.

The simple question that has arisen is: What is the major pre-occupation of the ANC as the ruling party and the government it leads?

Perhaps the answer to this could be found in Professor Sekgothe Ngwato Cedric Mokgoatšana’s observation in his PHD thesis entitled IDENTITY: From Autobiography to postcoloniality: A study of Representations in Puleng’s Works. Professor Mokgoatšana reflects on the state of voiceless and mouthlessness that was inherent in the apartheid system of governance. In his analysis of Puleng Samuel Nkomo he situates the state of mouthlessness as echoed in the lines:

Bjale ke hlokišitšwe molomo
Ga ke na lentšu le boikarabelo... (Puleng 1983:30)

Now I am denied a mouth,
I do not have a voice and responsibility
Ga ke na molomo,
O nkamogile
Go lekane (Puleng 1981:8)

I do not have a mouth,
You have taken it away from me
It’s enough.

Professor Mokgoatšana intimates that the figure of a defaced mouth points to the colonial subjects’ inability to express themselves even in issues that directly affect them. To be without a mouth is to be denied the right to speak, an inability to make meaningful sounds to express one’s views and ideas. These bodies are muted, voiceless, and when they have to speak their voices are shut into silence or whisper:

Dinatla di notleletšwe tša hloka maatla ...
Tša hlokišwa molomo mogopolo wa bolela ka sehebehebe. (Puleng
1983:57)
Powerful people are impounded and deprived of strength,
Denied the freedom, their minds can only whisper.

The anatomy of the lack of space, time and rostrum to express diverse viewpoints affects the consolidation of constitutional democracy. The expression of cogent opinions, ideas and worldviews do help to construct a dispensation biased in favour of all citizens as opposed to obfuscation.

Further, Professor Mokgoatšana advisedly said that their corporeal and anatomical disfigurement, coupled with their voiceless and speechless representation, describes the extent to which the subjects are subjugated and marginalised. The voice as the fulcrum of human existence distinguishes humanity from other species in the animal world. It gives one the power to express ideas clearly and eloquently, rather than in a muted form.

The power of the word, which is the basis of speech, lies in its articulation. Because the voice is an animation of ideas expressed, to be devoid of speech and the ability to speak or to express one’s self is to perpetually drift to the margins of power and authority. It is in these margins that the power to control wrestles with the power to be controlled.”

Given the bill of rights enshrined in the Constitution, it is inappropriate to cajole people into lunatic fringes. Freedom of opinion and speech, even when political parties and government disagree with their substance should be treated with respect, modesty and tolerance. Those are the essence and traits of a well-functioning democracy. Failure to do so may tempt the listeners to continue harbouring false ideas devoid of veracity, substance and understanding. In such an environment, the truth becomes the loser and the falsification of reality shapes the confluence of the country’s possibilities.

Cass Sunstein’s book, Why Societies Need Dissent contends that “a well-functioning democracy has a culture of free speech, not simply legal protection of free speech. It encouraged independence of mind. It imparts a willingness to challenge prevailing opinion through words and deeds. Equally important, it encourages a certain set of attitudes in listeners, one that gives a respectful hearing to those who do not embrace the conventional wisdom. In a culture of free speech, the attitude of listeners is no less important than that of speakers”

Sunstein’s clarion call for encouraging the independence of mind has not been heeded by the political leadership. For instance, this was not for the first time the ANC and government responded with reservations, severity, punch and keenness to the commentary of business leaders. In 2003, Pieter Cox of Sasol received the ire of former President Thabo Mbeki's after the disturbance over Sasol's declaration of BEE as a business risk. Further, in 2004, Mbeki posed more than ten questions about Mr Tony Trahar (then CEO of Anglo American plc) about South African political-risk he referred to in his interview with the Financial Times. Consequently, Mbeki implored Mr Trahar to provide details of the South African political-risk “to empower us to take better-informed decisions in future.” In 2007, Paul Harris, First Rand Chief Executive Officer decided to postpone and re-work its nation-building anti-crime campaign in which citizens would be called upon to write letter to former President Thabo Mbeki. It was in this context that Cox, Trahar and Harris were also put to test and wrapped over the knuckles by the government for what was perceived to be undermining the reputation and good standing of the country.

An understanding of this discourse in a broader context is clear that one cannot put an Elastoplast to heal the inability to accept diverse views. It constitutes an eloquent description of a society devoid of voice and thought. To a greater degree, this bears a living testimony to the state of silence, speechlessness and affirmation of the level of quietude. This does ensnare the capacity of society to freely express worldviews. The continued infantilising of the discourse and polarities is regaining its fashionableness. It is a socio-political construct that creates a room for recalcitrance and complacency. Doubtlessly, it is a lucid representation of society and the trouble South Africa faces.

This mode of social organisation does not appreciate and embrace the broadness of leadership. Consequently, this thoughtless and brainless approach has focused less discussion on policy brewed, tested and inflicted on the persona on the basis of morbid theory. They suffer from what Hegel calls the “dialectic of sense-certainty, seeing and hearing have been lost to consciousness and as perception which brings together for the first time in the unconditioned universal.” This means that this would turn to nothing else as the “one-sided extreme of being-for- itself”. Resonant and timeless leadership creates a possibility for renewal, consensus and governance for social awareness and tolerance.

The views expressed by Khoza and Griffin ought not to become tabooed voices that have been deliberately silenced and whose worldviews have been inferiorised. The quartet could as well be advised not to disown ideas and conviction expressed by business leaders. It is a telling observation of the defining challenges facing South Africa. The architects and apostle of this attack must not abrogate to themselves the monopoly and wisdom of political leadership. The point of the matter is that statements by both Khoza and Griffin are not about personalities. They are posing a challenge to the possibility of inelasticity on policy uncertainty. The forthcoming ANC Policy Conference scheduled to take place on 26 to 29 June 2012 at Gallagher Estates could immensely benefit from this cogent and substantive statements from business. They are not ephemeral and detrimental to the ANC and government’s pursuit to build a national democratic society during the second transition.

There are, however, a variety of impersonations or parodies that have arisen in this discourse.

Parody One: A study and understanding of international political economy of business becomes necessary. Politics and economy are not anti-thetical to each other. They are complimentary. They co-exist. They have a synergetic relationship. They are inter-dependent. It behoves the country to acknowledge, recognise and appreciate the ecosystem and sociology of the two phenomena. It foregrounds the importance of politics and economy. This deconstructs Mantashe’s paradigm of thinking that Khoza must focus on business outside of politics.

Parody Two: The ANC has abrogated to itself the monopoly and hegemony over political leadership in South Africa. Dr Khoza’s statement on the political leadership’s moral quotient which is degenerating and the ANC/Government responses is an admission of the correctness of the observation.

Parody Three: The purpose of the recent ANC Top Six meeting was not clearly articulated except to inform the nation that they are united. This, in itself, has proven Khoza right that they are unable to lead the ANC and the country “due to sheer incapacity to deal with the complexity of 21st century governance and leadership.”

Parody Four: The guillotine that has been placed on the head of Dr Khoza confirms the blurring of the state and party in a constitutional democracy such as South Africa.

Parody Five: Dr Khoza’s statement seeks to divert attention away from his perceived failure to sell Nedbank. This is wrong on two accounts. His two books on leadership entitled, Let Africa Lead and Attuned Leadership confirms that he is always present in the national discourse by providing thought leadership in more ways than one. This is also complemented by the book he co-wrote with Mohamed Adam on the Power of Governance, enhancing the Performance of State Owned Enterprises.

Parody Six: Dr Khoza’s statements on the annual report are an attack on the ANC and government. This is wrong on two accounts. The statement acknowledges the president’s state of the nation commitments on infrastructure development identified as a priority and in the Minister of Finance’s budget speech. “We would also like to see the planned infrastructure projects being undertaken in collaboration with the private sector,” Khoza declares.

Further, Dr Khoza says that “at the same time local government and municipalities in many areas of our country are in dire need of efficient administration and management. We believe government and the private sector should collaborate to create a programme to deploy these unemployed graduates and recently qualified people to local authorities for a few years. Corporate SA can play a key role in sponsoring these graduates for the duration of their employment in local government”. Dr Khoza understands the broadness of leadership as intimated in the books he published. His views are not driven by what some call opportunism. They are driven by attributes such as agility, adaptability, foresight, decisiveness and savvy. Attacks that are wholly banal have been proffered by people who have not read and understood the essence of statements on the annual report(s).

Parody Seven: Dr Khoza owes his perceived success to the ANC. This warped logic has not been backed by any scientific and irrefutable evidence. The less said about it the better as it is fundamentally wrong on many accounts.

Parody Eight: Dr Khoza’s statement on upholding our constitution is a sequel to government’s decision to review the powers and decisions of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court of Appeal. This may be correct owing to our obligation to respect the supremacy of the constitution. In any case, this is what the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Jeff Radebe, called for on the occasion of releasing a discussion document on the transformation of the judicial system and the role of the judiciary in the developmental South African State on 28 Feb 2012.

Parody Nine: The most serious concern in the current conjuncture is that Nedbank faces the danger of losing government business. It will not be because Khoza dared to submit a view contrary to that of the ANC. It will be because he spoke truth to power in keeping with the tenets of the bill of rights imbedded in the Constitution.

Parody Ten: The treatment that Dr Khoza has been subjected to exposes the vulnerability of expressing diverse views. Sunstein’s view on expressing diverse views in a well-functioning democracy is not simply a legal protection of free speech. It encourages independence of mind and it imparts a willingness to challenge prevailing opinion through words and deeds.

South Africa is a magnificent and dynamic country. In a well-functioning democracy, a culture of free speech and independence of mind is encouraged. It imparts a willingness to challenge prevailing opinion through words and deeds. As Professor Mokgoatšana intimated
“the voice as the fulcrum of human existence distinguishes humanity from other species in the animal world. It gives one the power to express ideas clearly and eloquently, rather than in a muted form. The power of the word, which is the basis of speech, lies in its articulation…or to express one’s self is to perpetually drift to the margins of power and authority. It is in these margins that the power to control wrestles with the power to be controlled.”

We must not allow the country to be stampeded into and tabooed from expressing diverse views emasculated by hegemonic discourse, power, authority, and control. Irrefutably, we must not permit the herd mentality to detain this beloved country onto a catacomb of intransigency, rigidity and recalcitrance.

REFERENCES
1. Absa. Annual report. 2011/2012
2. Nedbank. Annual Report 2011/2012
3. GWF Hegel. 1977. Phenomenology of Spirit. New York: Oxford University Press
4. Cass Sunstein: 2003. Why Societies need Dissent. London: Havard University Press
5. Reuel J Khoza. 2005. Let Africa Lead. Johannesburg: Vezubuntu Publishing
6. Reuel J Khoza and Mohamed Adam.2005.The Power of Governance. Enhancing the Performance of State Owned Enterprises. Johannesburg: Pan MacMillan
7. Sekgothe Ngwato Cedric Mokgoatšana. Doctor of Philosophy and Literature. IDENTITY: From Autobiography to postcoloniality: A study of Representations in Puleng’s Works. June 1999

Each civilisation has its own merits and (de)merits. The spectre of (non)patriotism is pervading in South Africa. It is infiltrating different assets of life. It is haunting the patriotism, integrity, legitimacy, values and principles of South Africa’s constitutional democracy. It is a spectre of social cataclysm. It represents the concomitant commotion in the national imagination. It defines the nation devoid of uprightness and decorum. It gives birth to (un)civilisations bereft of human capabilities and potential.

This was reflected when President Jacob Zuma was charged for rape and corruption in 2005 and 2007 respectively. His appearance at the Pietermaritzburg High Court and Johannesburg High Court was characterised by acute myopia and contempt on the part of some of his supporters. This bigotry witnessed the printing of T-Shirts written 100% Zulu Boy referring to President Zuma. T-shirts bearing the picture of former President Thabo Mbeki were burnt. The ANC logo was subjected to the same pain of getting burnt at a stake.

To be exact, the public anguish, agony and anger vented out at that time created space for the falsification of the truth. The space was occupied by people who believed in defending Zuma from perceived obliteration, provocation, execution and crucifixion. The news agenda and national discourse was dominated by people who incessantly vented out anger and abhorrence against Mbeki.

A website, Friends of JZ was created in support of Zuma. There was an urban legend and a misguided belief that state apparatus were being used to obviate the possibilities of Zuma becoming the President of the country. This mania became believable to those who were pushing for this vile agenda. This conduct by Zuma supporters and acolytes was not condemned with the contempt it merited. It became an accepted demeanour. Reasonable people kept quiet. The approach became acceptable!

History has a way of repeating itself. Consequently, in the evolution of history roles do get reversed. When Julius Malema, President of the ANCYL and his team were charged by the ANC, roles were reversed biased against Zuma. Again, T-shirts bearing the picture of Zuma were burnt. The ANC logo was equally burnt. Public resentment and abomination against Zuma defined the national discourse and agenda. The lessons learnt, strategy and tactics from the defence of Zuma when he was charged were being implemented without fear. They have learnt from the worst. The worst became the best. It continues to become an accepted demeanour.

On the occasion of the Human Rights Day Commemoration this year, residents in Sharpville were angered that the official memorial of the day had been moved to Kliptown in Soweto. Out of public ire and aversion, demonstrators burnt the South African flag in protest of the Human Rights Day commemorations being moved from Sharpeville to Soweto, Kliptown. That people took cudgels against the state confirms Vaclav Havel’s observation on the power of the powerless. Havel retorts that “the original and most important sphere of activity, one that predetermines all the others, is simply an attempt to create and support the independent life of society as an articulated expression of living within the truth.” The Freedom Charter was launched in Kliptown in 1955. Notably, Schedule 1 of the Constitution outlines the nature, character, content, meaning and significance of the National Flag.

The displacement of the erstwhile apartheid system of governance and the decisive ushering of a new democratic era in 1994 brought with it a possibility for South Africa to redefine and reassert its common identity. Like any other evolving society engaged in a struggle to regenerate its statehood and nationhood, South Africa has had to review a number of symbols which did not give true a reflection of her extra-ordinary richness in sync with the values, needs and realities of a new society. That is, the country has had to break away from a divided past condition of history and create a proudly South African character in which the living expression of a nation could nurture the realities of our contemporary and ordinary existence.

This historical necessity involved the raising of the new flag in 1994, the adoption of an inclusive national anthem, national flag, unveiling of the new coat of arms, renaming a number of social institution in recognition of the contribution made by South Africans of all hues in the liberation struggle, including the introduction of memorial lectures with a view to reclaim and rediscover a uniquely South African identity.

It was Former President Nelson Mandela, who, in his inaugural address on 10 May 1996 implored that ‘our daily deeds as ordinary South Africans must produce an actual South African reality that will reinforce humanity’s belief in justice, strengthen confidence in the nobility of the human soul and sustain all our hopes for a glorious life for all’

Pointedly, to reinforce this commitment to progress from despair to hope, President Mbeki, during his inaugural address in 1999 observed that since we are “no longer capable of being falsely defined as a European outpost, we are an African nation in the complex process simultaneously of formation and renewal.”

Consistent with these two eponymous observations shaped by the stages of rich historical developments since 1994, the public discourse has been dominated by a contestation of ideas on what it means to be a South African, who we are, who we aspire to become in a changing world and continentally how we can contribute to the evolving African century, while at the same time actively participating in a process of building a humane and peaceful world order.

The recent burning of the South African flag on 21 March 2012 patently communicates a message that people do not have respect for this national symbol. They see the flag as valueless. Other countries don’t disrespect their flags like that. The bane that we are facing in this country is that people, including those in positions of responsibility always ask themselves the parochial question: What can I take from this country as opposed to what can I contribute? We must learn from former U.S. President John F. Kennedy when he retorted that “ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country”.

March as the third month in the national calendar represents divergent worldviews and polities in South Africa’s national calendar. True to form, March was declared a Human Rights Month in honour of the people who laid down their lives for the emancipation of South Africa, Africa and the world. It so happened on 21 March 1960 that 69 people were massacred by the apartheid juggernaut at Sharpville. The meaning, significance and essence have created a possibility of this national day to be declared a public holiday. It was at Sharpville where the Constitution was launched to bestow the sacred and distinct honour to the place, the people and affirm constitutional democracy.

If they are to remain agents, we need to respect our national symbols. Like a plant whose life depends on sunlight and water for survival, the protection of our national symbols lies squarely on its continued need to uphold different forms, both written and spoken, as source of our identity. To wit, we have to create a hope that is permanent. The pain is gone. All the doom and gloom that were (or are) dominating the analysis about our country must dissipate.

To wit, we need to incarnate patriotism, integrity, legitimacy, values and principles of South Africa’s constitutional democracy.The late Professor Kader Asmal agreed “that we do not need to invent or imagine the values that make us uniquely South African, the values on which we can build our democracy. This is the cement, the glue that makes us different-not for better or worse, but different-from other peoples, who are searching for their own paths towards peace and democracy.”

It is this cement that will solidify our vim and consolidate the enthusiasm to remain uniquely patriotic and faithful to the Constitution!

REFERENCES
1. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Act 108 of 1996
2. Vaclev Havel. 1978. The Power of the Powerless.
3. Prof Kader Asmal, MP, Minister of Education. Plenary Address at the Values, Education and Democracy Conference. Kirstenbosch, Cape Town, South Africa. 23 February 2001

It is, perhaps inspiring, celebrated, defining, resilient and at times amnesiac to lose the appetite for ambivalence. In this connection, it is significant to be honest to the objective realities of memory and its meaning. They both unashamedly represent the epicentre of the balance of supremacy, influence of the eras, continuities and discontinuities. The release of Reverend Frank Chikane’s Eight Days in September: The Removal of Thabo Mbeki and the re-publication of his autobiography, No Life of my Own books have captivated the centre of attention and imagination. These are the allegories of their times as delivered by Chikane.

A critical reading of the books confirms that any dramatis persona is shaped by history and circumstances. Although the content is characterised by ideas and personality, Chikane chronicled the tomes on the basis of his objective and subjective experiences within the rubric of dimensional circumstances. Further, Rev Chikane pushed against orthodoxies in historiography and chronicling momentous developments as he witnessed them unfold.

Dr Chikane was not at the African National Congress (ANC) National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting at Esselen Park when the epoch making decision was taken to recall former President Thabo Mbeki. There was no precedence from the ANC NEC drew from. It was purely a political decision of the ruling party to recall one of its own from the position of responsibility to which he was deployed. Having become mercurial and without being captured by a slovenly approach to writing, Chikane conveys his experience not in a straitjacketed manner, but in a much wider scale.

The utility and meaning of the word “Recall” became disputed and became a subject of scholarly and legal scrutiny. A closer reading of South Africa’s Constitution as inscribed in Act 108 of 1996 reveals that the word “recall” does not appear anywhere or in any other legislative piece(s) approved since the ushering in of constitutional democracy.

Related to the above, Dr Mosibudi Mangena, former Minister of Science and Technology wrote the piece, the Recall of a President and retorted that “Recall is a well-established party political concept, but how does it sit in our constitutional dispensation?”

Furthermore, Dr Mangena noted that “the recall of Thabo Mbeki was a seismic political event that tested the foundations and credentials of our democracy. It did trigger the formation of a new political party, Cope. But we survived. However, with the dust settled, we need to debate the implications of what happened and correct those tendencies that might be injurious to our country.

Internal political dynamics in the ANC produced the recall of Thabo Mbeki, but he remains a valuable son of the soil who gave his all to the country and the continent of Africa. His enormous capacity, intellect, experience and expertise should still be harnesed for the good of Africa.”

Dr Mangena’s statement bears a living testimony that former President Thabo Mbeki’s legacy remains firmly etched in the memory and imagination not only of those in the ANC. It finds tangible manifestation in South Africa, Africa and the world in more ways than one. Whatever differences, some opposition parties cherished and treasured the imprint Mbeki has left in a rapidly changing polity. However, it must be acknowledged that none of us is perfect. The devil lies in the detail and the angels lie in the realities. In such circumstances, it is important to leave the differences and explore the possibilities. Myth-making including the historical phenomenon that unravelled shapes the perception, orientation, consciousness and paradigm thinking. This includes but not limited to resilience, power, character, inspiration and maturity as custodians of personality and thinking.

It was the late Dr Frederick Van Zyl Slabbert, in his book The Other Side of History who describes what he calls an anecdotal reflection on political transition in South Africa. He summed up the character of the emergent phenomenon when he postulated that “it has been said that when people define a situation as real, it becomes real in its consequences. When such a situation cannot be corroborated or disproven, and people still persist in defining it as “real,” one has the defining quality of a myth…. Eventually myths disappear when the weight of historical pressure and evidence make then irrelevant.”

Professor Zanemvula Kizito Gatyeni Mda, better known as Zakes Mda published a novel, The Heart of Redness in 2000. Conversely, Stephen Gray and Andrew Offenburger savaged Mda by accusing him of cribbing and duplicity. For the novel, Mda chose Jeff Peires’s book The Dead Will Arise which he duly acknowledged in the novel. Without any doubt, the publication of any book tends to ignite socio-political commentary that is contested and contestable based on the tools of analysis, conditions and circumstances from which people read and understand the text.

This is also outlined in Thomas Kuhn’s book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, in which he argues that when new scientific evidence challenges assumptions of a dominant paradigm, the myth becomes redundant.

On the whole, what are the controlling ideas inherent in Chikane’s books? In responding to this core question, it must be recognised that there is a range of theses, angles, paradoxes, contradictions, continuities and discontinuities within which the two allegories could be reviewed, critiqued and appreciated.

Thesis and Assumption One: Chikane is assertive and is relating his own personal experience and thoughts. There is a kind of self-assuredness, resistance and paradoxes in the latitude and mastery of the material. It is to be expected that ad hominem attacks will be made against Chikane including accusations of compromising information security in accordance with the Minimum Information and Security System (MISS).

Thesis and Assumption Two: Reverend Chikane, as the man of the cloth could easily be accused of his perceived failure and incapacity to forgive and forget. The Lord’s Prayer appeals to God “to forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Others may be quick to draw parallels amongst Chikane’s rejoinder(s) to Judge Hillary Squires judgement on the State versus Schabir Shaik and 11 Others delivered on 31 May 2005, Former President Thabo Mbeki’s Statement on relieving Mr Jacob Zuma of his responsibility as the Deputy President of the Country on 14 June 2005, Judge Chris Nicholson’s judgement delivered on 12 September 2008, Statement by the NEC of the ANC On the Recall of the President dated 20 September 2008 and the Supreme Court of Appeal judgement delivered on 12 January 2009. It will be interesting to note Chikane’s responses to all of these famous judgements and developments. Accusations may be made to the effect that he took a posture of being emotional and unmoved depending on the case at hand. In essence, it could be argued that his responses were not balanced based on the contradictions, continuities and discontinuities inherent in each case.

Thesis and Assumption Three: The publication of the books on the Eight Days in September could be registered as a concrete expression of Dr Chikane’s resentment at the Recall of Mr Thabo Mbeki. Linked to Thesis and Assumption Two, it could be reasoned that Chikane was moved, miffed and concerned about how the Recall was conducted by the ANC NEC. An accurate and meticulous reading of his autobiography on his suspension by the Apostolic Faith Mission (AFM) from October 1981 to September 1982 reveals the emotions, feelings, sense and tone of being excommunicated by the institution whose divine mission he sought to serve. In expressing himself on the past the nation both inherit and interpret, it could be argued that parallels could be drawn between Chikane’s suspension from AFM and the recall of Mr Mbeki. It could be maintained and echoed that Mr Mbeki’s recall was a stark reminder of the historical conditions he (Chikane) has had to contend with on the occasion of his suspension.

Thesis and Assumption Four: It could as well be apposite to contend that the books is part of the bigger “Fight Back” Strategy and Tactic biased in favour of Mbeki and his perceived disciples. Nonetheless, the Fight Back stratagem and method cannot be equated with the content of the Democratic Party (DP) election campaign strategy in 1999. What does this fight back seeks to achieve? What uncertainties and difficulty does it seek to resolve? This riposte to this question will be responded to in the next Thesis and Assumption.

Thesis and Assumption Five: The book, whatever the difference, reclaims reasserts and reaffirms the Thabo Mbeki Legacy. Chikane drew comparisons between Mbeki and Kwame Nkrumah, the late President of Ghana, the single most important “theoretician and spokesperson” of his decade. Africa’s Renowned Writer, Ngugi wa Thiong’o reveals that Nkrumah’s “Ghana became the revolutionary Mecca of the entire-anti colonial movement in Africa. Everywhere on the continent, the former colonial slave was breaking his chains, and singing songs of hope for a more egalitarian society in its economic, political and cultural life and Nkrumah’s Ghana seemed to hold the torch to that life.” Arising from this, it is not surprising that Chikane dedicated a chapter on Mbeki: The Kwame Nkrumah Way confirming Ngugi wa Thiong’o’s worldview of the centrality of a “theoretician and spokesperson” of Africa’s course in a given moment. Kwame Nkrumah’s book Towards Colonial Freedom published in the fifties mirrored the dream about a new and better tomorrow in Africa.

Nkrumah’s book, Mandela’s Long Walk to Freedom, Luthuli’s Let My People Go, Callinico’s Oliver Tambo’s Beyond the Engeli Mountains, Peter Abraham’s autobiography, Tell Freedom, Brian Bunting’s Moses Kotane’s South African Revolutionary, Joe Slovo’s The Unfinished Autobiography, Ellen Kuzwayo’s Call me Woman, Modisane’s Blame on History, Biko’s I Write What I Like are shaping the future for new directions with total confidence. These works are incisive in their observation and lampooned the culture of silence that may militate against the realisation of socio-political change. A collection of Mbeki speeches and a number of books have been published about Mbeki by Mark Gevisser, William Gumede, Ronald Suresh, Adrian Hadland and Jovial Rantao amongst others.

Within the present juncture, Mbeki, without any compunction, owes South Africa and the world a volume from which we will learn from great optimism and faith in the capacity of human beings to remake the world and renew ourselves, as Ngugi implored. Patiently we shall wait for such a tome.

It could be postulated that the fact that South Africa boxed above its weight in Africa and international community during the Mbeki epoch is an affirmation of his celebrated contribution. Put differently, it is not his legacy. It is the ANC and South Africa’s legacy that he helped create. The truth cannot be suppressed and falsified that Mbeki shaped the texture, content, radical ideas, form and character of the African Renaissance thus creating a possibility of ushering in an African Century. It was through his heroic contribution in the African Continent and the world that Mbeki truthfully and fittingly responded to the World Bank’s question “Can Africa Claim the 21st Century?

Thesis and Assumption Six: One of the paradoxes inherent in the books is that Chikane could as well be accused of having earned the fault-finding epithet of servility to Mbeki. His extraordinary intimacy to Mbeki as relayed in the book has tended inform his selective account on some issues. Similarly, we need to draw solace from the objective reality that the book is not about Mbeki per se but about his removal as the President of South Africa. Chikane’s autobiography is predominantly about vertical and horizontal dimension of ministries, the importance of the relationship between the Chosen People and God whose spirituality is the bedrock of humankind’s terrestrial and celestial world. It outlines the social dynamics and eschatological dimensions in South Africa.

Thesis and Assumption Seven: Another assumption and contradiction to be derived from the work(s) is that the timing of the publication is intended to set the tone, influence and set the agenda for the ANC Policy Conference and emergence of Transformational Leadership at the Mangaung National Conference. One has already touched on these complexities in the piece Polokwane and Mangaung: A Broken Sense of History posted on 23 December 2011.

Thesis and Assumption Eight: Chikane’s volumes on the President’s removal confirms that the ecosystem, orientation, social existence and consciousness have gone through dynamic changes in the South Africa. Dialego advises, in Philosophy and Class Struggle that the world must be understood within the context of dialectical materialism as a tool of analysis. This means that society is alerted to the need for change within the objective conditions that exist. In this context, this creates a possibility to recognise the existence of society around the nature of the world, ideas that create indisputability and idea of the truth. It is the mark of Edward Said’s Truth to Power. In essence, the Sense, Intention, Feeling, Tone, Symbol, Emotion and Imagery of should consolidate constitutional democracy.

Thesis and Assumption Nine: Another thesis to be derived from the books is that it strives to strengthen or weaken the ANC as the national liberation movement. The book on the President’s removal was released few days before the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ruling on the Democratic Alliance appeal on the records relating to the suspension of criminal charges against President Jacob Zuma in 2009. The timing, meaning, pitfalls and potential consequences of the release of the book during this period could correctly or incorrectly be interpreted as a confirmation of Thesis and Assumption Seven around agenda setting for the ANC Policy and National Conferences. The novice and ill-trained will boldly say that, “President Zuma has long requested for his day in court. The ruling may give it to him. It will afford him a possibility to clear his name in a court of law once and for all.”

Thesis and Assumption Ten: It could be argued that Chikane’s book is perhaps an intellectual antenna that searches for meaning, preservation of national heritage and memory devoid of obliviousness. Memory ought to be preserved. In this connection, tradition, culture, norms, values and principles are the sinews that are integrally holding society together. It is a memory against forgetting. Appreciably, there is no successful social transformation that did not have an intellect at its centre. The struggle against amnesia with boundless rigour, vim and energy finds resilient mien in Don Mattera’s Memory is the Weapon. There is no gainsaying that blankness of any form, content and character must not be allowed to lull society onto mediocrity.

The books afford us as a nation the possibility to obviate any potential constitutional paralysis. The contents of the book(s) ought not to be attacked and downplayed. They ought to be embraced. This will enjoins us to recognise, uphold and consolidate aspects aimed at consolidating constitutional democracy in South Africa. We have a lot to learn from the combination of the circumstances inherent in the way the recall was conducted and the way it has been narrated in the book. The meaning of memory in the book(s) depict the uniqueness, but something incomparably more solemn in the service of veracity, the truthful life, and the attempt to make room for the genuine aims of life. In other words, it imposes an obligation on us to continue serving truth purposefully and articulately to tell the great South African story.

REFERENCES

1. Dialego. 1987. Philosophy and Class Struggle. London: Inkululeko Publications
2. Frank Chikane. 1988, 2012. No Life of My Own. Johannesburg: Picardor Africa
3. Frank Chikane.2012. Eight Days in September: The Removal of Thabo Mbeki. Johannesburg: Picardor Africa
4. Frederick van Zyl Slabbert. 2006. The Other Side of History. An anecdotal reflection on political transition in South Africa. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers
5. Ngugi wa Thiong’o. 1986. Writing Against Neocolonialism. The Red Sea Press: Wembley
6. World Bank. 2000. Can Africa Claim the 21st Century. The World Bank: Washington, DC

Hernando de Soto’s compelling book, The Mystery of Capital notes that “one of the greatest challenges to the human mind is to comprehend and gain access to those things we know exist but cannot see. Not everything that is real and useful is tangible and visible.” It is common sense simplicity, laid out in the consciousness of attentiveness, existence and the foundation of sustainable progress. Among other things, Hernando de Soto found it appropriate to enumerate five mysteries, namely:

(i) the mystery of missing information
(ii) the mystery of capital
(iii) the mystery of political awareness
(iv) the missing lessons of US history
(v) the mystery of legal failure: why property law does not work outside the West

In a South African context, some of these mysteries go into the kernel of leadership, Mangaung 2012, education, theory, praxis, public good, public bad, honest administration and defining South Africa’s story in the confluence of major possibilities. The list could be considerably longer. The human mind’s effort to address these obstinate challenges requires the will, capacity, focus and strategic insight for they are not palpable and detectable. Many have begun recalling the modern champion of African identity, the late Cheikh Anta Diop’s advice on three competing factors that form the collective personality of a people which are: a psychic factor, the historical factor and linguistic factor. All of these factors are subject to literary and scientific approach. Further, Diop warns that any undertaking that adopts compromise as its point of departure as if it were possible to split the difference, or the truth, in half, would run the risk of producing nothing but alienation.

The rigour and complexity of state, constitutional consensus and governance in South Africa has a long and troubled history. The existence, consciousness and orientation of the country in affirming constitutional democracy, as a consequence must be guided by the theory that Caesar’s wife should be above reproach. Certainly, these principles have hitherto become that towering edifices in protecting and upholding human rights. The hiatus inherent in democratic governance, whatever the challenges, it is accordingly necessary to state the obvious for the sake of emphasis and deconstruct the interregnum that may exist. Naturally, the public legitimate expectation is that policies and their implementation must be concerned with the reasons and motives for the decisions to usher in the Public Good.

It is, as it were, an affirmation of active citizenry, not out of metaphysical and insubstantial quantity, but giving expression to reclaiming the soul and history of national development. It is purely not out of arrogance or self-righteousness. To say that social change and transformation has immediate benefits for everybody falsifies the truth in the midst of complexity between the state and citizenry. From this standpoint, it downplays and undermines the objective assessment of the existential circumstances characterising the state’s impact on the populace. For so intricate are the limits, opportunities, prospects and pitfalls that propelling the country onto a higher trajectory has proven to be laggard. Nothing is forever. It is hard and tormenting that the indecorous and indelicate have been said about South Africa’s perceived failure or fear of virtuality to engender public trust and integrity. It is a moment of unreason not supported by well thought-out strategies and tactics in an evolving nation. It appears as though this moment of unreason has unleashed a fusillade against South Africa’s plebeians.

In such cases, Adolfo Gilly applied the dynamic meaning and impact of social transformation, governance, state and citizenry, in his introductory remarks to Franz Fanon’s volume, A Dying Colonialism. He writes that “revolution is mankind’s way of life today. This revolution is changing humanity. Life acquires a sense, transcendence, an object: to end exploitation, to govern themselves by and for themselves, to construct a way of life”

The story of the revolution also relates to the Arab Spring that occurred in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. The titanic struggle between the public bad and public good characterised the pursuit for peace, stability, civilisation and leadership. It is patently clear that nothing is forever. It could be argued, from the vantage point of history, that the Armageddon of repression, oppression and discrimination has a short life span to define what is “tangible and visible”. I am of the view that it is, for the nation has a possibility to reignite or reincarnate active citizenship for a society based legitimacy, responsiveness and openness.

There are South African leitmotifs that are playing themselves out in pursuit of social change. These include, but not limited to ANC policy documents, crafting a script for posterity, integrity, security and legitimacy of the state, Leadership, The Public Good and without doubt, the DNA of South Africa’s constitutional democracy. A critical examination, analysis and assessment of the current discourse reveals the sui generis nature of the struggle for the public good, shared understanding, appreciation and recognition of who we seek to become. The judicious conclusion that could be derived from this is that the legitimacy and possible veracity of some claims in The Second Transition is of no moment.

Questions have arisen from the contents of ANC policy documents such as The Second Transition. What is the underpinning problematic the ANC seek to resolve during this second decade of freedom? What are the inherent policy permutations, contradictions, orientation and empirical consciousness? In what way will this make the leadership accountable? What is the nature of the progress made since the 2000 National General Council’s call to build a new person? How could its theory and praxis be replicated across society? What is to be done? How, why and by whom should it be done? To what degree will the treasure of our society be protected and upheld? How could that give a living profile to the historical moment towards the DNA of South Africa’s constitutional democracy?

Questions and their responses do shape what the African (Ghanaian) philosopher Kwame Gyekye calls the concept of a person: soul, spirit and relationship between the two. Understanding begins with disbelief. It does not begin with conviction and certainty. It revolves around telling and relating human experiences. This is the product of the ability to distinguish amongst claim, fact, trust and suspicion. New dimensional conditions, contradictions and circumstances require a heightened level of probity, reliability and conviction. It goes into the core of posterity, truth, power, memory, amnesia, meaning, timelessness, expectation, legitimacy, including the correctness of the worldview and paradigm espoused in a given moment.

Even the African Philosopher Gyekye believed that within the context of Akan conception of philosophy, “the ultimate goal of philosophising ought to be the concern for the nature of the good in mankind or society-for human value, and not for abstract matters for their own sake”.

For this reason, the substantial part must be biased in favour of the Public Good. Nonetheless, it would be inconceivable, in the course of decisive implementation to take our eyes off the ball, change the rules of the game thus red-carding both the players and spectators. This enjoins us to rid the country of the cancer that is devouring our national discourse and the future direction. This will help address the dialectical relationship between theory and praxis, concrete and abstract, subjective and objective realities guided by an appreciation that understanding begins with disbelief not faith. In essence, we cannot rely on self-created expectations based on suppositions, sensitivities and worldviews that are always in contest. Abnormalities will remain regardless of which elucidation is espoused.

The mysteries outlined by de Soto’s mysteries, Diop’s compelling competing factors to form the collective personality and Gyekye’s Akan conceptual scheme imposes an obligation for the realisation of the Public Good. Perhaps Adolfo Gilly showed consistent foresight when he retorted “people never forget the past-or what the past teaches them that is of importance for the future”.

It is going to be a therapeutic experience and extraordinary creativity to gainsay the Moments of Unreason. The impact on humankind equips the leadership to defend the veracity of the social change thus addressing the mysteries to affirm African personality. The ushering in of the Public Good shapes the national mood. It exercises the minds for the defence of the civilisation and correctly guides the compass to the desired future.

REFERENCES

1. C.A. Diop.1974. The African origin of Civilisation. Myth or Reality? Chicago: Lawrence Hill & Co
2. F. Fanon. 1959. A Dying Colonialism. New York: Grove Press
3. H. de Soto. 2000. The Mystery of Capital. Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere. London: Black Swan
4. K. Gyekye. 1987. An Essay on African Philosophical Thought: The Akan Conceptual Scheme. Philadelphia: Temple University Press

Surely, one of the most flummoxing occasions of our time has been the narrative around the review of the powers and assessment of the judgements of the Constitutional Court.

In the process of arriving at such denouement, Justice Minister Jeff Radebe, on 28 Feb 2012, released a discussion document on the transformation of the judicial system and the role of the judiciary in the developmental South African State. Quite correctly, the document notes that the establishment of the Office of the Chief Justice as a national department under the Public Service, “which is directly accountable to Cabinet, appears incompatible with the independent character of the Judiciary.” Furthermore, the document notes that “the judgments of the decision of the Constitutional Court will be evaluated against the desired transformation landscape.”

This was followed by the release of eleven African National Congress (ANC) discussion documents in preparation for the Policy Conference scheduled to take place on 26 to 29 June 2012. The discussion documents are necessary. Any honest debate and meaningful conversation is important for the consolidation of democracy and its benefits. The documents have raised the Faulknian sound and fury of some sectors of the South African society. A closer and critical reading of the Second Transition document reveals that the ANC bemoans the pace of social and economic transformation eighteen years into democracy. These issues, in essence, buttresses the observations made in the National Planning Commission’s Diagnostic Overview and the draft National Development Plan Vision for 2030. The problem with this perspective is that it is assumed by some among us to think that these documents are nothing else but proposals. It would be naïve to think that the ANC and the government are exercising their minds on programmes whose temporary steam is akin to that of a blemish Eno whose continued existence is its Achilles heel.

Sceptics, cynics, legal scholars, social commentators and different organised formations have raised their fingers to with a view to understanding the rationale and objectives that underscore such an assessment and review of the powers of the Constitutional Court including attendant judgments. It has left them enraged, bewildered and desecrated. Such unstatemanslike thoughtlessness is a sacrifice to integrity in public life, human pride, human equality and dignity. This is a red flag. To a significant degree, this opens a possibility for South Africa to gravitate towards a brink of human made catastrophe and constitutional paralysis. The discussion documents makes for persuasive cunning rhetoric and a clear representation of the mantra of political expediency. It is now as clear as mud that this seeks to assassinate the Constitution in a Gestapo style and fashion devoid of the essence of humanity, social wellbeing and freedom. There are still some seismic reverberations, strategic and tactical ineptitudes, not even a just smidgen of the independence, health and vibrancy of constitutional democracy.

There are a number of questions that have arisen in the public mind and imagination subsequent to the release of these documents:

What is the problem? What is the purpose? What do they seek to resolve? What do they envisage to alter and improve? What are the alternatives explored? What trade-offs are to be weighed? How and why should the proposals inherent in the documents be leapfrogged from liquidity to solidity? Why fix the constitution if it is not broken? To what extent is the Second Transition document reminiscent of WB Yeats’ Second Coming? Or putting it differently, do some in the ANC still believe the movement will rule until Jesus Christ comes back? Senzeni na? What has the Constitution done to deserve this ignominious treatment? Aren’t the misgivings and public outrage over these discussion documents justified?

It is mind closure to the confluence of major possibilities for rapidly growing country in global polity. It is murky proposals full of deceit. It cannot be equated with Becket’s Waiting for Godot. South Africa’s Achilles heels are corruption, cronyism, nepotism and incompetence. These are the inadequacies that constitute the bane of a country struggling to create the new out of the old. They are the nadir of our country.

All reasonable people would accept that the Constitution is society’s temple. It is the country’s edifice. The constitution is an epochal living document. It is a supreme law of the country. It is the cornerstone for social cohesion, inclusive, deliberative and participatory democracy. The Constitution belongs to the people of South Africa. Its raison detre, values, principles and norms gives expression to unity in diversity, redress, transformation and consolidation of constitutional democracy. The constitution, by its very nature, is not perfect. The assessment and review of the powers of the Constitutional Court is perhaps the most ill-omened, detainee of a Kafkaesque nightmare and devoid of strict norms of logic, social justice, integrity and decorum.

When the moment of unreason in the apogee of any mortal situation through the euphoria of the moment, it is ineffectual to seek explanations in the realm of constitutional jurisprudence, statecraft and governance. The fundamental issues become totally masked and society becomes the loser. Credibility is fundamental. Citizens, as stewards of constitutional democracy have an obligation and fiduciary responsibility to affirm the sacred nature and character of the separation of powers between the judiciary, executive and legislative. This will help deepen and consolidate democracy, retain legitimacy, exercise human rights whilst at the same time enhancing the culture of responsibility and accountability. The constitution enjoins us to advance, protect, uphold and build the foundation for human rights and freedoms ingrained in the Bill of Rights. The watchwords are responsiveness, transparency, accountability, openness to promote, protect, respect, and fulfil human rights, dignity and integrity.

Expectedly, this will spark a crisis of unprecedented proportions, because in the emotions of laggard state driven approach, the higher purpose gets compromised and sacrificed. The existence of public debate, open and transparent discussion about executive power, the choices they make, their impact on the backbone of society, the benefits and pitfalls are at the staple of democracy. The choices, trade-offs and proposals they make, must be subjected to critical scrutiny in the normalisation of society. People who understand their rights, how to uphold, practice and protect them contribute to the vibrancy, rigour and consolidation of constitutional democracy.

It is no time for reasonable people to throw their hands up in exasperation. It is without doubt important to take up the cudgels to uphold, defend and protect South Africa’s constitutional seismograph by shaping its substance through dialogue and debate. For the outcome of the review of the powers of the Constitutional Court to be believable, the architecture of the judicial review ought to be premised on meaningful participation without downplaying the contributions made by all sectors of the society. This will bring with it honour and public good to the country. It will be metamorphosed from current perceptions of distrust and ignominy around the intended objectives of the discussion documents. This will not in any way demonstrate our lost moral compass. It will serve as festival of ideas. It will be an eye-opener and mind-expander giving birth to a percussive collective solution ushering in a new consciousness.

When Things Fall Apart
After and for Chinua Achebe
If you are afraid of your reflection
Do not come my way
At times I am mirror
If I am a receptacle
You will see your life
And the particles of your death
Collected in me

In this poem, Professor Keorapetse Kgositsile, renowned South African poet laureate and writer underscores the phenomenon which is too complex to unravel. Derived from his book, This Way I salute You, William Butler Yeats’ poem The Second Coming, Chinua Achebe’s novel Things Fall Apart, Professor Kgositsile outlines the paradox, complexities and contradictions of anxiety, uncertainty and volatility in South Africa, continent and the world. The utility of the SIFT SEI tools of literary analysis in this instance reveals the lightning speed characterising the particles of social change and transformation. Even more significant, the defining traditions, principles and values of consolidation, consistence, clarity, integrity, loyalty, truthfulness and timelessness are sorely lacking in the sociality of the South African nation. One is afraid that we have not been able to respond to Dr Ivor Chipkin’s question, Do South Africans Exist?

What is vital though is that the discussion document, Towards a Ten Year Review, a synthesis report on implementation of government programmes noted that “over the past few years, many in the judiciary have shown a profound understanding of constitutional imperatives and set out to defend the basic law of the land. Yes in an evolving polity, the issue of the appropriate balance among the three centres-the judiciary, the executive and Parliament-is one that will continually be contested. Overall, the debate about the balance among the three centres of the State arises in part from the question whether the judiciary may be tempted to position itself as a meta-state above other centres-a contestation that has arisen in other polities around the issue of “judicial activism.”

The contestation, continuities and discontinuities around the discourse on the separation of powers is necessary and relevant. It makes democracy work. Democracy becomes the loser when an over-emphasis is placed on one or two at the expense of the other(s). The efficacy, viability, agility and continual robustness of the judiciary, executive and legislative help consolidate constitutional democracy. Recent claims and counter-claims that the Judiciary is counter-revolutionary, dictating national policy and usurping the role of the executive does not help to create a confluence of major possibilities to build a society at peace with itself.

The myth of the separation of powers has been raised by Montesquieu around 1729-1730 during his stay in England. Louis Althusser’s book, Politics and History. Montesquieu, Rosseau, Marx. Radical Thinkers contends that Montesquieu presented a classical theory to which every good government rigorously distinguishes the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

Nonetheless, the recent statement by President Jacob Zuma around the review of the powers of the Constitutional Court raises a welter or questions. In the interview with the Independent Newspapers, President Zuma intimated: “How could you say that the judgement is absolutely correct when the judges themselves have different views about it.” The President added “there are dissenting judgments which we read. You will find that the dissenting one has more logic than the one that enjoyed the majority. What do you do in that case?”

Without responding to the question, perhaps we need to appreciate and recognise that the judges in the Constitutional Court are not a homogenous entity. If they were, these would have compromised their decorum, integrity, legitimacy and credibility. Dissenting views are the hallmarks of constitutional democracy. Judgements have nothing to do with their correctness and undue veracity. They have to do with constitutionality and probity based on the balance of evidence.

The commentary by President Zuma is a sequel to the statements he made during the 2011 Access to Justice Conference and the speech he delivered to bid farewell to former Chief Justice Ngcobo and the ushering in of Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng on 1 November 2011. The President suggested at the Access to Justice Conference that “those who disagree with the ruling party politically, and who cannot win the popular vote during elections, feel other arms of the State are avenues to help then co-govern the country.” Furthermore, the President intimated that “we also wish to reiterate our view that there is a need to distinguish the areas of responsibility, between the judiciary and elected branches of the state, especially with regards to policy formulation.”

Adv Ngoako Ramatlhodi, Deputy Minister of Correctional Services, Member of the Judicial Service Commission and former Chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice stated that the constitutional framework reflects “a compromise tilted heavily in favour of forces against change. However, there is a strong body of thought, arguing the view that our constitution is transformative. In this regard, a point need to be made, that a constitution can be either progressive or reactionary depending on the balance of forces in the society it governs. In our case the black majority enjoy empty political power, whilst forces against change reign supreme in the economy, the judiciary, public opinion and civil society. The old order has built a fortified front line in the mentioned forums. Given massive resources deriving from ownership of the economy, forces against change are able to finance their programmes and projects aimed at defending the status quo.”

The puzzle was also concluded by Mr Gwede Mantashe, Secretary General of the African National Congress (ANC) when he indicated that “the independence of judiciary and separation of powers must never be translated into hostility, where one of those arms becomes hostile to the other. My view is that there is a great deal of hostility that comes through from the judiciary towards the executive and Parliament, towards the positions taken by the latter two institutions. Unless this issue is addressed deliberately it’s going to cause instability. It undermines the other arms of government and this could cause instability. Once you have that, then you will have a perception that says the judiciary is actually consolidating opposition to government.”

The conclusions that could be drawn from these statements (by Zuma, Mantashe and Ramatlhodi) are that the courts are interfering with the role of the Executive to develop and implement policy. The second conclusion is that perhaps they are concerned that the judiciary is positioning itself as the “meta-state” through “judicial activism” in the national polity. The third perception created is that the judiciary has assumed a supreme role and thus stampeding, downplaying and minimising the role of the Executive and Legislative. The fourth assumption that could be drawn from these statements is that the judiciary is deliberately reversing the gains and breakthrough registered since the ushering in of a democratic epoch in South Africa. The fifth conclusion is that the courts through “judicial activism” have been tempted to become a meta-state and consequently “co-govern” the country at the expense of the ruling party.

The sixth assumption created is that the Constitutional Court is hostile to the Executive and Legislature. The seventh conclusion proceeds from the premise that the Constitution was a compromise and remains an obstacle to human development. The eighth supposition created from time to time is that the Constitution is an impediment to the transformation agenda. The ninth assumption made is that the constitution remains an albatross to societal change and transformation. These assumptions, suppositions, discernments and deductions are as much serious and diversionary to the affirmation and protection of constitutional democracy. All of these conclusions and assumptions must be put through a magnifying glass and subjected to critical and scientific scrutiny. They are not closer to the truth and objective reality.

The separation of powers laid a basis for the Montesquieun provision of checks and balances for the consolidation of constitutional democracy. Judge Kate O’Regan points out that “in a constitutional democracy the relationship between the three arms of the government (state) is structured in a way to ensure that the power of each is checked or restrained by the other.” In a sense, this has helped to affirm the centrality of the Constitutional Court and its role in the protection of democracy.

The questions, by their nature, give birth to immense assumptions. A situation that is palpable for the review of the powers of Constitutional Court must respond to the fundamental questions that arisen in the debate. They call for a thoughtful discourse. What is the motive behind this review? What justifies this review? What is the nature of the powers that will be reviewed? Why will the powers be reviewed? For whose benefit will these powers be reviewed? In what way will the review contribute to the affirmation of South Africa’s constitutional democracy?

When the Constitution was adopted on 10 May 1996, South Africans were expectedly and ordinarily to genuflect before the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Expectedly, South Africa was brim-full with enthusiasm, vim, vigour, confidence and elegance. In reality, we were not obtuse about constitutional democracy and its contribution to the public good. It is perilous to open space and time for those who undermine or gainsay the centrality of the South Africa’s constitutional order. In general terms, the constitution does not allow people to drag the socio-economic needs of the country to the grave.

The paradigm of thinking and critical analysis of the call for the review reveals the moral nakedness and philosophical nothingness of the assumptions attendant to the debate. The advantage of this call for the review of the powers of the Constitutional Court provides a possibility for a national debate. In addition, it brings onto the fore the legitimacy, benefits, prospects and limits (if any) of the powers of the Constitutional Court. It is unfortunate that populism contrary to scientific research has ascended to the zenith of the current debate.

To return to Professor Keorapetse Kgositsile, one believes that the Constitution affirms who we are and who we seek to become to honour and respect the constitutional values. This will uphold our integrity in public life, veneration for human rights, moral rectitude, triumph of the public good and faithfulness. One is afraid that if we are afraid of our reflections, we may not earn the reputation for access to justice, humanity and public good with our conscience intact. One remains sceptical!

The Constitutional Court is playing a cardinal role in the administration of justice. The integrity, independence, decorum and credibility of the court as an independent judicature must be accorded the dignity in the advancement of human rights and freedoms. This goes into the kernel of the constitution, public good and society. Faithfulness, loyalty, honesty, humility and integrity must underscore the South African Jurisprudence shaped by the Constitution as the supreme law of the Republic. The sacrosanct nature, content and character of the Constitution must necessarily be cherished and upheld in the midst of diverse needs and wants.

REFERENCES

1. Adv. Ngoako Ramatlhodi. The Weakening of State Authority Sowing seeds of
Implosion. September 2011
2. Keorapetse Kgositsile. Selected Poems. This Way I Salute You. Cape Town:
Kwela/Snailpress
3. Ivor Chipkin. 2007. Do South Africans Exist? Nationalism, Democracy and the
Identity of ‘the People’. Johannesburg: WITS University Press
4. The Presidency. Policy Co-ordination and Advisory Services (PCAS). Towards a Ten
Year Review. October 2003
5. Louis Althusser. Politics and History. Montesquieu, Rosseau, Marx. Radical
Thinkers. London: New Left Books
6. Judge Kate O’Regan. A Forum for Reason: Reflections on the role and work of the
Constitutional Court. Helen Suzman Memorial Lecture. 22 November 2011

The ushering in of a democratic epoch in South Africa has brought with it immense opportunities, possibilities, paradoxes and allegories. Owing to the complexities and continuities of the issues, there is virtually no space for dogmatism. This requires of citizens not to merely express their tentativeness. It obliges of the country to effectively put the issues through the prism of diagnostics, agnostics and prognostics without losing sight of the higher purpose. The release of the National Development Plan Vision for 2030 is a high-water mark for the country’s better tomorrow arising from yesterday’s experiences and today’s contemporary dimensional circumstances and conditions. For once, the country has taken decisive forward steps to create society to be proud of. The Plan points towards a rational discussion about the future to be created and the benefits to be gained. Implemented rigorously with vim and zest, the gains could be multiplied in a rapidly changing polity. This calls for a healthy osmosis of the paradox.

However, this does not discount the objective reality that the country is going through a paralysis and the crisis is becoming organic. It has taken the form of the Protection of State Information Bill, national government intervention in provincial governments by invoking section 100 (1) (b) of the Constitution, the effective utilisation of state resources to fight factional political battles, institutionalisation of factions, dearth of thought leadership, paucity of a controlling or galvanising idea and unity of centrifugal forces and selfless stoicism. Such a kamikaze performance is not playing a defining role in developing the nation, human action, reason and thought. It has become necessary to be attentive to the analytic terms we use. It is significant to go back to discourse or tools of analysis about the nature of the world, the country, continent, the relationship that exist between objective and subjective realities. To elaborate this point, it will help to appreciate and comprehend that “no one can climb on your back unless you kneel down for them to do so”.

On this account, a welter of questions and observations has become immanent in de-constructing the South African society. Why is corruption so well entrenched in South Africa? We live in a corrupted world. Those captured by the insatiable lust to be rich have attracted undeserved sympathy. Put bluntly, victimhood or victimology has been consigned on them. What is the defining character of this period?

In recent times, we have witnessed the most fluid environment. The issues, not enumerated in terms of their significance are (a) fluidity (b) humble ordinarisation of the membership and country at large (c) verdict of the ANC membership at Mangaung: what are the facts about Mangaung? What are the dialectical, legal and political concerns about it? (d) growing yawning distance between the political leadership, constituencies and government (e) the challenge and contradiction of the National Liberation Movement (NLM) and centennial celebrations (f) weaknesses of the ANC Communication Strategy such as how the Dr Mathews Phosa and Mr Malusi Gigaba issues were handled. The communication gaffs may be an undoing to the ANC (g) the belligerence and bellicosity characterising the ANC today. (h) The ANC has lost a high moral ground (i) Weakening of the Judiciary (j) the absence of a shared common and controlling idea within the ANC and (k) the struggle to control tenders. All of these issues raise a fundamental question: Is this an illusion of the Movement without a Movement?

The credo or the DNA of the ANC in responding to current challenges must not deviate from the script thus rendering the Movement somnolent in a changing world. The centennial cerebration offers both the ANC and the country a perfect template to arrive at our nirvana. More broadly, as the ANC prepares for the next centenary it becomes necessary and relevant to resolve these issues in a manner that does not create an illusion of the Movement without a Movement. In a sense, shaping the character and content of the agenda for the next centenary requires what is outlined in the UNDP Human Development Report 2011.

The Report points out that “human development is the expansion of people’s freedoms to live long, healthy and creative lives, to advance other goals they have reason to value, and to engage actively in shaping development equitably and sustainably on a shared planet. People are both the beneficiaries and the drivers of human development, as individuals and in groups.” The central and complex matter of human development is equally captured in the 1992 “Ready to Govern” document which outlines the vision for a democratic South Africa and the recent policy expressions to construct a developmental state.

Equally, this is given a concrete expression in the preamble to the Constitution that it was adopted to:

• Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values,
social justice and fundamental human rights;
• Lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based
on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by the law;
• Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person
and
• Build a united and democratic South Africa able to take its rightful place as a
sovereign state in the family of nations.

The preamble is a decisive call to action. It is a reflection of the unity in action and unity of purpose. It is a perfect commitment to transform society from liquidity to solidity. The constitutional democracy and its values cannot, advisedly, be objected raucously to adopt the choices we need to address the myriad of questions and observations that have become immanent in de-constructing the South African society.

Ben Okri’s historic address, A Moment in Timelessness delivered on 26 August 1997 is telling. He intimated that: “And so our choice is simple and concurrent. This choice is ours. We rise or fall by the quality of the choice we make. But then the choice we make is utterly dependent on the light that we use, and the light of lies we live by”.
To collectively and individually resolve an illusion of the Movement without a Movement, we will rise or fall by the quality of the choice we make. The choice is ours.

REFERENCES

1. UNDP. Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future
for All.
2. Ben Okri. A Moment in Timelessness. 26 August 1997
3. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
4. ANC. Ready to Govern. ANC policy guidelines for a democratic South Africa as
adopted at the National Conference. 31 May 1992