Like most paid up members of the chattering classes I have become less freaked out about the prospects of a Jacob Zuma presidency over the past few months. Mr Zuma has impressed me not so much with what he has said – although it is nice to hear such an important man making solid statements about everything from the xenophobic violence in Alexandra to the murderous violence in Zimbabwe – but with the fact that he is saying anything at all.
Mr Zuma seems to understand that being a good leader is also very much about connecting and communicating with the people and talking about their hopes and fears. He has demonstrated an understanding that a President must really act as a cheerleader in chief of the nation – something that President Thabo Mbeki seems to find distasteful and, quite frankly, a bit beneath his dignity.
Apart from other faults he may have (some of which I have documented on this blog!) , President Mbeki often comes across as aloof and uncaring. I am sure our president cares deeply about the well being of the poor and marginalised in our country, but sadly he does not always seem capable of showing it. He often appears as if he thinks a President is too important and posh to talk about the fears and concerns of ordinary people on an ongoing basis.
Mr Zuma, on the other hand, has shown himself to be a master at playing the perceptions game and of making the right noises to make different sectors of South Africa feel as if their concerns are listened to and taken seriously. But just when one has almost managed – with lots of willpower and determination – to begin to see Mr Zuma as a caring and thoughtful sort of guy, he comes out and says something so appallingly stupid and craven that it takes my breath away.
A case in point is his statement, reported this morning in our local fishing village rag, the Cape Times, that South Africans should debate the scrapping of bail for specific crimes such as murder, rape and robbery. According to the report, Mr Zuma said he felt the country’s laws and judicial system may be too user-friendly to criminals. “How do you stop crime? Maybe we should think about scrapping bail for specific crimes.”
I happen to disagree with the popular perception that our bail laws are too lenient. As properly interpreted by the Constitutional Court, the legislation seems to strike the right balance between the rights of the accused on the one hand and the rights of the public on the other. Of course, as Ms Carmichelle can attest, the bail laws are not always properly applied, but that is another matter altogether.
But that is not why I find Mr Zuma’s statement absurd. It is because he himself was an accused in a rape case and he himself has stated on numerous occasions that we cannot judge him because our Constitution guarantees for everyone – including himself – the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
We allow most accused persons to be let out on bail pending their trials exactly because they have not yet been convicted of any crime. To suggest that all people accused of certain crimes should not be given bail is really to suggest that we should take away the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Such legislation would almost certainly be unconstitutional because it would fundamentally limit this important right in our Constitution.
But it is this exact same right on which Mr Zuma and his supporters have relied so often in defending him against attacks. The statement is therefore completely illogical and makes no sense. Unless of course, Mr Zuma thinks one set of rules should apply to him and another set to all other accused.
He of all people should know that not all those people who are arrested for rape or robbery or murder are guilty of a crime or are ever convicted of the crime they are charged with. It would therefore be unconscionable to punish such innocent people by locking them up on the say so of the police. Down that road lies a police state.
Of course to solve the crime problem is an extremely difficult task and will require more training for a better run police force and rapid social and economic upliftment of the poorest South Africans, a narrowing of the gap between richest and poorest citizens, and the rebuilding of the social fabric destroyed to some degree by the migrant labour system.
That seems too difficult, so why not just lock up everyone accused of being a criminal? If Mr Zuma’s logic had been followed by the Mbeki government, he would have spent many months in jail before being acquitted on the rape charges. What worries me is that he does not seem to have thought about the sheer hypocrisy of his position at all.
It is embarrasing to say the least. Hopefully Gwede Mantashe and the other top ANC officials will have the guts to whisper in his ear that he really should not say such things because they make him look, well, very dumb.
I can’t help but smile (I am sure you expected this) because as I have said I believe the pro-Zuma tide will turn amongst those who recently changed their mind about him. It often is more of a choice against Mbeki or more especially his way of doing things.
Read one of Zuma’s (?) speeches and you’ll smile at a hopeful future. Listen to what he says in the unguarded moment, and it all comes crashing down.
With politicians you have to try and read between the lines, to even look at what they aren’t saying, to get at the real honest thinking patterns, those unguarded moments. We’ll get more of those with smart journalists who are able to extract those kinds of utterances.
I am sure if someone took the time to compile snippets of Zuma statements over the past 10 years, you could come up with a scary picture! Maybe I will sometime.
Z,
I am sure you like Zuma as much as I do or Pierre or Khosi does. What is this guy using, to have so many people behind him? A muthi? But our guy tends to be sporadic, as an Americans would say. You just never know what he will say next. He is full of surprises. For a lover this kind of a trait is a winner. But a leader needs to have some measure of predictability on certain issues. Surely a President-in-waiting needs to have an elementary understanding of human rights – and their foundations – that never changes no matter what (no matter who is to benefit from a particular right).
On changing our minds about leaders, including about Zuma, you Z and Wessels are being unfair on Pierre or even myself by calling us hypocrites. First, Zuma WILL be our next State President in 2009 – especially now that we told his corruption may not until 2010- and there does not seem to be anything anyone can do about it. The masses want him as their leader as their President we may as well start to see the positive in him, even if it is for making us fall asleep at night. To be fair he has – until now- been making some solid and timely statements, as Pierre points out and as I have pointed out in the previous blogs.
But our guy, as I say above, seems to have an attention span of a 4 year-old, much like Gadaffi (Lybia), I read somewhere. So, Pierre, no matter how many times any of his close friends whisper what to say to him in public, he will simply surprise them and shock the rest of us. I bet now they have to stay all night preparing defences of his latest statement on bail. I must admit, he seems quite a responsibility to have for a leader, or a friend, for that matter!!
Your right that sounds like a crazy thing to say. But I still give Zuma the benefit of the doubt.
Provided he surrounds him with the right people he could be allright. It’s better to have somebody that knows he needs to consult than have Mbeki who always thinks he alone is right.
South Africa have many competent people who could be excellent ministers and advisors. Gwede is somebody I have allot of hope in, his comments on the Scorpions not with standing.
Mandela was not a hands on president at all, (although admittedly not dumb either). He did the connecting with the people, moral leadership and created an atmosphere, a frame work within which people could operate.
In a country with such a divisive past its really important to have a leader that can connect to people, especially the poor.
“Die hoop beskaam nooit”, as my mother would say.
Jacob Zuma never ceases to amaze me with his public statements. Apart from the fact that its scary, I have to admit that its hilarious too.
Our country has come so far in enforcing human rights, especially with regards to our criminal law reform. From abolishing the death penalty to the principle of being innocent until proven guilty by a competent court. Siya, its Mr Zuma’s popular, unconstitutional statements that makes him the hero of the masses (that and the fact that he is the ‘victim’ of a political complot not to have him as our next president by ‘Mbeki’ camp supporters). Now, that is a scary picture.
I wonder how far back South Africa would go in enforcing basic human rights should Mr Zuma become president. Like Desmond Tutu said, not so long ago, we need a president that will not make us bow our heads in shame. Will Jacob Zuma allow us to keep our South African pride? Only time will tell (even though the likelihood is quite dim, given his countless, embarrassing and shameful public statements).
Siya
“even if it is for making us fall asleep at night”
hehe, ignorance is bliss.
“you Z and Wessels are being unfair on Pierre or even myself by calling us hypocrites”
Hayi, Siya. I didn’t call anyone a hypocrite on the Zuma thing
. I did make a prediction though. Is it not fair to want a president that actually has a firm grasp on policies and policy issues. Someone who has spent years, refining and honing his and his parties views? If he had would he not have shown more consistency? Even if he has a slightly different view on one aspect (can’t agree on everything), he could still articulate his parties policies, no? In that instance should he not submit his personal views for the sake of policy? Personal views taking precedence CAN become dictatorial (not IS or WILL).
I personally don’t like the idea of a cheerleader, with a strong team. He could then easily serve as a distraction, while the real movers and shakers remain cloaked behind a veil. A cheerleader can also easily be underestimated once in power, for ultimately a lot of power will still be vested in him, all the more so if popular with the masses.
I reiterate my earlier comment and might do so again in future. This speech alone is enough to send the warning bells to 100 decibells.
“http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=6&art_id=vn20080505052937761C818044
His statements here sound a lot like oft used rhetoric of African independence leaders who advocated one party states and who often attached a messianic type mission to themselves (I can provide examples of this on request). The belief that the ANC is the only organisation that can serve black people in South Africa does not even need rebuttal in terms of logic (emotionally a different story).”
Multi party democracy? Or as he said “our country” (our is debatable but context leads to ANC). He is not going to make me sleep better at night, by telling everyone what they want to hear. Numerous dictators did the same, speaking out against evils and becoming it themselves. I am NOT saying he WILL be a dictator, but that it would not surprise me. His rhetoric have some of the common nuances of those that have been.
It is someone who rather sings about machine guns, than ploughs. And yes of course it has sentimental value, but why not change the lyrics. Why not take a positive step and say “Now is the time for building, not for guns!”
It would be unwise for me to make predictions regarding how he would be when in power, but to outline a couple of scenarios and then look at the likelihood based on his actions and speech. Some scenarios are too likely for me to sleep well right now.
“What is this guy using, to have so many people behind him? A muthi?”
He dances and sings revolution songs and tells everyone what they want to hear, and is apparently charming in person. That is a good way to get the vote of the man on the street and that alone is a lot of power right there.
Lorenzo and Wessel,
I could not agree more with both of you. Lorenzo Lets hope Mr. Zuma’s unconstitutional statement on bail will only secure him popular vote but will not lead to our 16th (?) Constitutional Amemdment. That would be very devastating indeed.
Wessel, thats the spirit I am talking about. Lets hope Mr. Zuma appoints the right persons to the right ministries in his Cabinet. And that from now on he will say in public more of the sensible stuff and less of the scary ones.
Z,
”ignorance is bliss”. Let me turn the other cheek for you.
I must apologise for accusing you of something you did not say, call people “hypocrites”. Any criticism of Mr. Zuma now cannot get any more original. We have all been around when Mr. Zuma has been making news headlines for all the wrong reasons. His Presidency is now a matter of “when” and not “if”. Its more scary than exciting, but its is something we have to come to terms with. The way I see it is that we may as well start treating him the way would a child. He says or does something stupid, we scold him (criticise him), he says something solid and sensible, we say GREAT!. That may make some of us appear hypocritical sometimes. I would prefer appearing hypocritical to staying up all night till 2014.
Well, the fact that he enjoys such massive support behind is a no-brainer. First, we have largely unsophisticated electorate that votes along colour lines and not based on substance of the candidates. Secondly, the emergence of the two camps within the ANC has contributed to his popularity as the preferred leader to Mbeki. Thirdly, as Prof. Pityana has pointed out, Mr. Zuma will say anything at any given point in time, depending on who he wants to please.
About his popular song, Mushini Wam (my machine gun), so many people, including myself, and within the ANC (Terror Lekota in particular) criticised his singing of the song. I used to sing and liked the song while growing up. It was relevant then. But I do not see its relevance now, it least not its original form. Now the song has proven to have had a devastating impact on the attacks on immigrants in Alexandra. It was reported on SABC TV news (19 May) that some locals were attacking immigrants singing this song, and Zuma has come out against it. It is exactly this kind of effect of the song that many people were warning about.
So, yes, the now certain Presidency of Mr. Zuma kind of makes my hair stand up. But it’s a certainty I feel we have to find ways of positively embracing.
Siya
” ”ignorance is bliss”. Let me turn the other cheek for you.”
I really meant it in a funny, brotherly, light punch to your shoulder kind of way. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
“treating him the way would a child”
Lol.
“Well, the fact that he enjoys such massive support behind is a no-brainer.”
Sorry didn’t realise your question “What is this guy using, to have so many people behind him?” was rhetorical.
I hear what you are saying. It’s no use fighting the inevitable. How are we going to make any difference talking about it.
I must admit that I am not a particularly practical kind of guy. My personality profile would say “knowing is most important”. So I place value on thought consistency, theoretical integrity and truth for the sake of it. I love the exchange of ideas and being able to influence and be influenced.
Yes in the broader range of ideas regarding Zuma, everything has probably been said, all possible options covered by someone. But in the details we might get finer glimpses as to what we will face. Who knows what that knowledge might lead us to do.
Z,
Confusion cleared, and everything else noted.
Wonderful!
BTW If I may ask without intruding on your privacy. Are you in the law profession? Or a law student?
Just curious based on some comments.
Z,
If it makes any difference to you, Z, I am in the law (human rights) profession. If you do not mind, what comments would these be? May want to improve on them so they do not give me away that easily.
Siya.
I’d have to search the exact statements, but it was in the way you interacted with Pierre on the law, in a knowing manner.
Z,
Oh, those would be my comments on the recent water judment and my comments on the constitutionality of the Forum for Black Journalists.
It is quite a joy, really, taking part on this blog. The readers of this blog (including yourself ) have been posting excellent and brutally honest opinions on certain issues. At times the bar is raised so high that one prefers to stay away altogether.
And thanks for showing an interest in my line of work, Z.
Siya
Probably the water judgment, I don’t remember reading the FBJ one. I’m new. I did see on a cursory search that a lot has been said here on Zuma by you and Pierre and others. So I understand that a lot has been said already as you mentioned earlier.
I like the fact that this blog has a few regular intelligent people commenting, as well as very relevant articles. The fact that comments come from black and white, is also a prime motivator for me.
Oh and I couldn’t find you by searching on the net for what I know about you. So don’t be too worried.
Pierre,
It sounds like people are falling in love on your blog. Please ensure that all contributors get a wedding invitation. It is the least any lovestruck blogger should do.
A very observant and enlightening contribution z.
A veritable love in,
Pierre, can you print us some t-shirts with the words ‘Constitutionally speaking’ on the front?
Thanks Wessel, an excellent merchandising idea to augment my income as an academic.
Unlike a certain Judge President I should just remember to declare the income from the sale of such T-shirts to SARS….
Honestly, you guys just blow me away. Khosi’s probably right: it’s gotta be lurve, or something.
Khosi, Wessel, Clara
Jealousy makes you nasty!
Mqo
“A very observant and enlightening contribution z.”
Thank you. A voice of reason, now for some of the others…
How about individualised T-shirts.
Khosi loves TM
Mhambi(Wessel) loves de la Rey
Clara loves Siener.
Pierre loves … I’ll spare you this time.
z,
you’re late, i have got two t-shirts with his picture on. And a blanket.
Let me finish what you started though — Pierre would prefer loving JZ, yet JZ is self confessed ngqingili basher.
I tell you, sometimes living in this country is like living in the twilight zone. (that can be a t-shirt slogan too)
On a serious note, do we remember when people were warned against endorsing t-shirts written 100% Zulu something. The same people were warned against a certain song.
Ironically, the very same person who led the warnings is now required to send his troops to ensure peace, law & order.
Khosi
My mistake I should have known about your t-shirts. But the blanky caught me totally off guard (:
ngqingili: Is that Xhosa for gay?
I did not know about the T-Shirts and song warnings.
z,
ngqingili: Zulu but I guess Xhosa is also a part of the Nguni family.
Where were you around November & December last year?
khosi
Nov/Dec I was working way too hard after hours, to be in touch with normal society.
Ok, let me give you a heads up.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1682289,00.html
and more,
http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?pDesc=47551,1,22
Khosi
Thanks. The tv teaches violence, songs don’t, is his message. I wasn’t surprised by: “Delegates greeted this statement with thunderous applause.”
His ability to live with contradictions in thought, is quite unnerving. I fear it merely hides his true beliefs.
And “He says he fought apartheid not for lofty ideals like racial equality, justice and democracy but because “I was oppressed.” ”
As good a reason as any. But that kind of practicality can be corrupted by some non-lofty but practical ideas.
z,
just trying to achieve balance.
Yes the infamous “balance”. When you mix Oros, balance is 3 parts water to 1 part Oros. Just a arbitrary thought, unrelated to the discussion. (: