As seductive as certain perspectives of international law may appear to those who disagree with the outcome of the interpretative exercise conducted by this Court in the contempt judgment, sight must not be lost of the proper place of international law, especially in respect of an application for rescission. The approach that my Brother adopts may be apposite in the context of an appeal, where a court is enjoined to consider whether the court a quo erred in its interpretation of the law. Although it should be clear by now, I shall repeat it once more: this is not an appeal, for this Court’s orders are not appealable. I am deeply concerned that seeking to rely on articles of the ICCPR as a basis for rescission constitutes nothing more than sophistry.
Anybody watching Tokyo Sexwale in conversation with Stephen Sackur on the BBC News’ HardTalk programme yesterday could not but have concluded that Mr Sexwale has declared his candidacy for the Presidency of the ANC.
In some respects, Mr Sexwale’s performance was brilliant – especially if contrasted and compared with the testy, brittle, and sometimes gaff-prone performances of our current President. Mr. Sexwale might not have won over Zwelenzima Vavi or Fikile Mbalula, but he was charming, warm and charismatic while also making a relative amount of sense – for a politician at least.
But when asked about his Presidential ambitions, Mr. Sexwale was forced to give the most tortured and unbelievable answers. He looked like Bill Clinton talking about not having sexual relations with that woman. Because the ANC still follows the now bizarre and dangerous rules around the selection of its leaders devised in exile, no one is supposed to want to become leader of the organisations.
Like Jesus or Moses, in the ANC leaders emerge through osmosis from the masses of our people to lead. All the ANC branches somehow independently from one another decide to anoint one candidate, but how they know which candidate, no one can tell us. Of course this “mystical process” is nothing other than backroom fixing by the party leaders – something that was necessary in exile for security reasons.
As Karima Brown points out in today’s Business Day, the ANC’s process for the election of leaders is part of its Stalinist political culture.
Happy to use Bill Clinton’s and Tony Blair’s pollsters and election gurus, as well as their cosy relationships with business, Mbeki’s ANC has said “thanks, but no thanks” to their political culture of open debate and transparent leadership races. Instead, SA’s ruling party sticks to — and even entrenches — modes of operation more in tune with the communist party of the
Soviet Unionbefore the era of Gorbachev.
I have argued before here and here that
I think many of the present internal problems of the ANC stems from the fact that there is no real internal democracy in the ANC. The highly centralised system around a relatively unpopular leader breeds resentment and frustration. A law that requires every party who receives money from the state to meet at least some minimum standards of internal party democracy would go a long way to cure this terminal defect. Such a law could also address requirements for open and transparent party funding.
Strangely enough the main opposition party, the DA, also seems to oppose such a move on the ground that an ANC Parliament would make a law that would harm the DA. To me this seems to reflect a paranoia that is usually only displayed by a Cabinet Minister attacked in the media or by the average Jacob Zuma supporter.
Maybe the real reason for the DA’s opposition to such a party law is that such a law would also require openness and transparency when it comes to the finances of the party. Strangely enough, this idea horrifies both the major political parties. We know what the ANC has to hide, but what is the DA hiding?
If it is really true that an electorate gets the political parties it deserves, then we South Africans do not deserve much at the moment. Maybe