Former president Jacob Zuma was the butt of many jokes for his seeming inability to master big numbers, leading to unkind comments about the South African presidency and making of it a laughing stock. Little did we know there was more to come.
This week, President Cyril Ramaphosa took us to new lows with his statement that the ANC had decided that South Africa would withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), ostensibly because of the court’s bias against African leaders.
The point of the ICC debate is of course the planned visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to these shores in August, for the Brics summit.
The ICC’s recent issuing of a warrant of arrest for Putin would oblige South Africa to arrest him when he gets here.
A previous high court judgment put the onus on South African authorities to arrest former Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir, but he was allowed to skip the country before it could be carried out.
Stung by the Bashir decision, the government gave notice of its intention to quit the ICC, a decision reversed by the Ramaphosa administration when it assumed office.
The ANC conference in December last year, which gave Ramaphosa a mandate to lead, also rescinded the decision to leave the court.
This week, as is now known around the world, Ramaphosa announced that on the basis of an ANC decision South Africa would leave the court.
One might have thought that on a matter of such importance, also involving another country’s head of state, Ramaphosa would be absolutely certain of his words. He wasn’t.
Perhaps he was following the lead set by ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula, who seems to have “misinterpreted” the ANC decision in the first place.
Ramaphosa’s office had to issue an embarrassing climbdown, which must have had people around the world wondering just what is going on in South Africa.
In a short space of time, Ramaphosa and his office have bungled quite routine matters. Even the handing out of national awards was drawn into controversy.
This quite apart from the SABC issue, in which Ramaphosa seemingly dithered over the appointment of the broadcaster’s board of directors; or the question of the powers of new electricity minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa, who was appointed nearly two months ago.
After the Zuma years, we expected greater professionalism
Ramaphosa appears to be paying too little attention to his duties or is simply incapable of timeously taking decisions the country expects him to take.
Blame his advisers if you will, but let’s not forget that in Ramaphosa we have a leader who has dealt with the highest echelons of business and politics around the world — and he is a qualified lawyer, after all.
After the Zuma years, we expected greater professionalism and more resolute leadership in the running of our country. That hope now appears to have been in vain.
The goodwill generated by Ramaphosa’s presidency has all but evaporated.
It’s painful to read of our elected head of state, a man with a distinguished track record in the trade union movement and the liberation struggle, being regarded as inconsistent, a leader happy to be contradicted because he so often gets it wrong.
Ramaphosa and his office should take a long, hard look at how South Africa’s reputation is being hammered on the global stage, especially with the government’s controversial stance on the Russia-Ukraine war.
As South Africa traverses treacherous waters, with load-shedding and economic decline threatening the livelihoods of many millions, we need a steady hand on the tiller. We didn’t have that this week.
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.