Prof. Sipho Seepe
Hardly a week after President Cyril Ramaphosa told parliament that South Africa would not be bullied, his government was feverishly knocking at the door of Washington begging for an audience.
Amongst other things, Pretoria had hoped that Washington would reconsider its decision to cut aid following President Donald Trump's expressed disapproval of South Africa’s purported land reform policy and reportedly its case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The bully is reportedly uninterested in opening the door to engage with South Africa.
Expressing his frustration over Washington’s non-response to repeated requests for diplomatic discussions, the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ronald Lamola retorted. “The absence of a response to our calls for dialogue is concerning, especially given the importance of the issues we are facing globally.”
Considering the frenetic attempts to seek an audience with Washington, Ramaphosa should have been candid. After saying, “We will not be bullied.” Ramaphosa should have added. “We will move with great speed to prostrate ourselves and beg for your audience, understanding, and forgiveness”.
But such honesty would not have been in keeping with Ramaphosa’s character. Those who have sought to reinvent Ramaphosa by arguing that he had finally found his backbone will have to revise their scripts.
Cornel West could have been describing the current administration when he wrote. “Most present-day black political leaders appear too eager for acceptance to be bold, too self-invested in advancement to be defiant. And when they drop their masks and try to get mad (usually in the presence of black audiences), their bold rhetoric is more performance than personal, more play-acting than heartfelt.”
Political grandstanding to a sycophantic audience can take you so far, and no further.
In December 2017, before Ramaphosa assumed the presidency of the ANC and that of the country, I cautioned. “[Ramaphosa] judges the [direction] the wind is going and quickly follows. There is no bone or vein of integrity left in his body. He succumbs to any pressure put before him as long as doing so advances his ambitions. Dishonesty is Ramaphosa’s trademark.”
Fortunately, Ramaphosa could count on sycophants masquerading as journalists and analysts to advance his cause. For these sycophants, Ramaphosa could do no wrong.
Mondli Makhanya (City Press July 7, 2019) described this phenomenon as follows: “When Cyril Ramaphosa took office last February amid a wave of euphoria and optimism, it was hoped he would tap into this spirit and use it to consolidate his authority… Every speech, action, and gesture [were] met with gasps of “Wow!” Even the silly act of walking around in funny, colourful socks was endearing. When he repackaged old programmes and pledges to make them look like new ideas, even the informed public got excited. And when he took normal steps that anyone with the job description of president would take, it seemed revolutionary. So low was the bar. Strangely, he widdled all that goodwill away.”
Makhanya was later to describe Ramaphosa's presidency as Four, fruitless, wasteful years( City Press, 29/08/2021). He wrote. “South Africa’s unemployment rate now stands at 34.4%, up from 32.6% in the first quarter. Using the expanded definition of unemployment, which includes people who would have been discouraged from trying to find a job, the figure stands at 44.4%, up from 43.2%. This number has been climbing steadily over the years and the situation has been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic.”
Sadly, the material conditions of most South Africans have since gotten worse.
Nothing expresses Ramaphosa’s failed presidency more than the Pretoria News editorial, A president reduced to fixing potholes (5/09/2022): “The sight of President Cyril Ramaphosa patching a pothole in Mpumalanga while his fellow ANC comrades watch in glee is very sad. By all accounts, it shows that the governing party’s leader, and his organization, have normalized the abnormal…These desperate actions suggest that the ANC has internalized its service delivery failures.”
With nothing to show for his presidency, Ramaphosa’s acolytes have sought to reinvent him by crafting a new narrative. This narrative advances the notion that with the signing of the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act, the Expropriation Act, and the NHI into law, it may be necessary to see Ramaphosa in a new light.
Desperate times require desperate measures.
This is clutching at the straws. Even a cursory reading of these Acts would reveal nothing profound or progressive about these laws. The BELA Act and the Expropriation Act provide a mere modification of what already exists. The NHI amounts to nothing more than a pipedream.
First, the Expropriation Act is not what it is purported to be. Land reform rests on restitution, redistribution, and land tenure. The Act is not about any of these.
In his article, Expropriation Act: Much Ado About Nothing (City Press, 29 January 2025) Lubabalo Ntsholo paraphrases the legal opinion of many experts. He correctly points out that “Expropriation of property, including land, has always been part of our law, as is the case in almost every country…The act recently signed by Ramaphosa is a re-enactment of the 1975 Act, save for at least four instances in which it seeks alignment with the Constitution.”
The alignment ensures that compensation is just and equitable. The second is that “while the 1975 act made provision for expropriation for public purposes only, this new act makes it possible for expropriation to be done in the public interest.”
To that extent, “there is little difference between the apartheid law on expropriation and the new act. The white right-wing is horrified for no reason at all, their interests are still strongly protected by the new act. Those who are excited that this act may expedite the slow-paced land reform programme in the country have no reason to be excited at all.”
This is exactly what the ANC government wants to explain to Washington.
The BELA Act is hardly radical.
Schools are governed and regulated through the Schools Act of 1996 and precepts of the Constitution. The less contentious aspect of the BELA Act is that of making Grade R compulsory. The problematic section relates to the determination of the language policy in schools.
In terms of the South African Schools Act of 1996, School Governing Bodies (SGBs) may determine the language policy of the school. BELA Act recognises that the powers of the SGBs are not absolute or unconditional. Where circumstances require intervention at the provincial level, BELA provides detailed procedural steps that must be taken in the determination of the language policy of the school.
Those opposed to BELA want the provincial departments to play an infinitesimal role in the determination of the language policy. BELA does not replace the Schools Act of 1996. It simply provides clarification of the roles that should be played by both the SGBs and provincial departments in the determination of the language policy, should it be necessary.
The National Health Insurance (NHI) promises to provide universal access to healthcare services by establishing a centralized, national insurance fund.
According to the plan, the government will buy services from both the public and private sectors. With the crumbling healthcare system, NHI stands little chance of success. The signing of the Expropriation Act, BELA, and NHI can hardly be considered revolutionary.
Lastly, the unprecedented failure to present the Budget in Parliament this week does not augur well for the GNU.
Ramaphosa and the ANC have once again been rudely reminded that they are not in charge. It is no longer business as usual. Beyond the pretence and huffing and puffing by the ANC, the Democratic Alliance (DA) calls the shots. The DA’s opposition to the budget in its current form is not only about flexing its muscle in the GNU, but it is also about fulfilling the DA’s mission of bringing the ANC to its knees. The Federal Leader of the DA, Helen Zille has no time for games. Ignore her at your peril. No amount of spin can redeem Ramaphosa’s failed presidency.
* Professor Sipho P. Seepe, Higher Education & Strategy Consultant.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.
