I once believed South Africans would never allow the ANC or any political party to undermine our hard-won freedom, which we achieved in the face of dehumanisation and violence. But I did not understand how debilitating and disempowering it is to live with the consequences of a government that is indifferent to the suffering of its people.
Even though there were troubling signs in the early years, we did not foresee how the ANC’s criminal enterprise, as chief justice Raymond Zondo correctly referred to state capture, would permeate all levels of society.
I still believe in our ability to change the current course and build a society that is home to all.
Responding to questions about the R1bn cost of the state capture commission, Zondo said its contribution should be measured by the outcomes of its work, especially in ensuring looting never happens again. Unfortunately, other forms of looting, such as the personal protective equipment scandals during the pandemic and many other improper government contracts awarded to ANC cronies after former president Jacob Zuma’s departure, have left South Africans reeling.
“South Africa is a crime scene,” say young people as they watch further revelations of government tender contracts without results or shoddy work. “Yifilimu. Netflix, come this side, South Africa has scripts to beat the top Narcos series you have ever produced.”
We can undo the damage only when we speak honestly and openly about how decisions and processes that preceded the Zuma era paved the way. We must trace the beginning of this disconnection and lack of accountability.
The jokes do not hide disappointment, anger, despondency and mistrust of the government. With President Cyril Ramaphosa mired in a scandal involving his Phala Phala farm, people ask if there is political will to root out corruption. Sure, none of it comes close to the state capture era, but state capture did not happen overnight. The Gupta brothers arrived in Johannesburg like any migrant family seeking opportunities. They started selling shoes from the boots of their cars, then opened a small shop in Johannesburg's Killarney Mall.
Their shoes did not attract the discerning clientele that frequents the shopping centre, but important and strategic contacts were made, including with people such as former minister in the presidency Essop Pahad. They opened their business Sahara Computers. About the same time Pahad started his publication, The Thinker, and received funding from Sahara. The white, plastic-covered laptops were everywhere. I remember one premier, his wife and two other politicians had the ubiquitous machines, which they received as gifts.
Their criminal enterprise started small, a government tender here, a small contract there. Early on, people who collaborated with them started to speak about a newspaper that would have resources to cover neglected stories in all the provinces. Its title, New Age, sought to evoke struggle history and the journalism of famous martyr Ruth First and others who covered important battles all over the country in the 1950s.
How we got here needs consideration. We need to look beyond the immediate actors and the Zuma period and trace the disconnect between South Africans and their governments. If we are to prevent large-scale looting in future, we need to know how it was possible to weaken state institutions. How did the checks and balances so carefully developed in the early years of democracy fail?
This is a story about the betrayal of office and trust by those we elected to represent our interests. While the Guptas, Zuma and many others are the main actors, this is not only about them. This is a story about a government that gradually shifted its focus from working with the people to thinking it could work “for us” by making all decisions alone, generally without consulting us. It is also about the role of financial institutions and their complicity in corruption. This is possible because the government and regulatory bodies have repeatedly failed to hold corporates to account.
To undo the damage we need much more than the plans the president has unveiled. We need much more than Ramaphosa’s promise to overhaul South Africa’s “anti-corruption architecture” and vague statements about holding those responsible for state capture to account.
The president has listed the recovery of funds as one of the major achievements so far. In the context of lawlessness and the crippling of state institutions, this is welcome. But this is the work these institutions are supposed to be doing every day.
We can undo the damage only when we speak honestly and openly about how decisions and processes that preceded the Zuma era paved the way. We must trace the beginning of this disconnection and lack of accountability. We should revisit the 1998/1999 period when the ANC started to detach from citizens, sidelined public participation and prevented its members from questioning policy choices and decisions when the 1999 arms deal was put together.
All the poor decisions and disastrous policy choices of the ANC, especially starting in 1998 and 1999, have had a long-lasting, corrosive effect on South African society and the wellbeing of citizens.
To undo the damage we need much more than the plans the president has unveiled
The ANC heads to its national conference with some of the actors of the state-capture era headlining its list of leadership contenders because they do not expect the outcomes from the Zondo commission to prevent them from ascending to office and continuing to loot. They are emboldened because they know how the ANC operates.
Is it possible to prevent the repeat of the capture years? Yes. How?
First, by understanding and addressing how we got here.
Second, by demanding Ramaphosa provides a detailed plan on institutional recovery and strengthening.
Third, by placing the recovered monies in a special fund so they do not end up in the dark hole of the fiscus.
Fourth, by organising and mobilising to build real platforms of engagement and public campaigns that put these issues firmly on the political agenda, and exploring ways in which such funds can be used in a transparent, inclusive and effective way.
Furthermore, by undertaking campaigns that make it difficult for those implicated in state capture, including international and South African companies, to continue as if it is business as usual.
Most importantly, those who are committed to change must recover from the demoralisation that is the result of the state capture and corruption that followed in the Ramaphosa years. Mistrust and anger must be the fuel for new frontiers of struggle and we must demand greater participation in decision-making, irrespective of who comes into power in 2024.
• Gasa is a feminist, activist and researcher of land, gender, politics and cultural issues.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.