Ramaphosa not addressing Sisulu issue in lekgotla a tactical move, say analysts

President Cyril Ramaphosa yesterday failed to address the festering attack on black judges by Minister of Tourism Lindiwe Sisulu in his national executive committee (NEC) lekgotla statement.

Making as an oblique reference as possible to Sisulu, Ramaphosa said: “The ANC and the [Tripartite] Alliance reaffirm our support for the constitution, the Bill of Rights and the judiciary and distance ourselves from narratives that seek to negate its transformative intent and gains.”

He noted there was “widespread acceptance the ANC as an organisation is beset by severe challenges, such as weak structures, internal conflicts, factionalism and members and leaders acting in self interest rather than in furtherance of the cause of the people”.

ALSO READ: ‘ANC divisions are becoming a threat to democracy’, says Ramaphosa

“This has damaged the ANC’s standing as a servant of the people and leader of society,” Ramaphosa said.

“If we do not make a decisive break with the practices that have caused this decline in our standing, we will cease to be a trusted and effective agent of change.”

“We will be principled and decisive in ridding our movement from practices that prevent us from serving the people with distinction and honesty.”

ANC national spokesperson Pule Mabe has downplayed the public quarrel between Sisulu and Ramaphosa, vowing not to “feed into a media narrative that suggests a spat”.

While the spotlight over the weekend fell on Sisulu, when Congress of South African Trade Unions president Zingiswa Losi lambasted bickering ANC leaders, University of South Africa political science Prof Dirk Kotze, said: “From what I could gather, the NEC did not discuss the Sisulu matter, with the argument being that it was not on the agenda.

“The Sisulu matter might be addressed by some members but was not on the NEC lekgotla agenda.”

ALSO READ: No public spat between Ramaphosa and Sisulu, says ANC’s Pule Mabe

Kotze ruled out the possibility of Ramaphosa axing Sisulu “because this is the era of elections within the ANC and he may not want to face accusations of trying to eliminate his opponents”.

“He also does not want to give credit and a lot of ammunition to Sisulu by removing her from Cabinet – giving her an ability to mobilise for support on the basis of possible sympathy,” said Kotze.

He dismissed as “impossible” a notion the Sisulu factor could lead to other Cabinet ministers or NEC members breaking ranks.

Explained Kotze: “The Sisulu backlash is enough reason not to break ranks.

“Politically, she is not in a good situation, with her credibility being under pressure.

“Although she tries to avoid it, it is inevitably clear she is challenging President Ramaphosa.

“Over and above her opinion piece, she has challenged a lot of policy positions within ANC and government, with the response being so negative towards her.

“Other ministers might be in weaker positions and may not dare go that route.

“While this will die down quite soon, her political credibility has been harmed quite substantially – not a good start for her presidential campaign, with her future uncertain after the December elective conference of the ANC.”

ALSO READ: ANC lekgotla: Cosatu lambasts squabbling leaders

Institute for Global Dialogue political analyst Sanusha Naidu concurred.

“President Ramaphosa has realised that, should he take action, he won’t be taking on Lindiwe Sisulu alone, but a grouping within the ANC that has no honour.

“If Sisulu is the face of this presidential campaign, she is putting herself up to be manipulated by the radical economic transformation faction.

“The president has no leverage within the NEC and they are now – through Lindiwe Sisulu – calling his bluff quite early.”

Associate professor Barry Hanyane of the University of North West’s school of public management said it was “regrettable that we have seen a communication breakdown between a government minister and a sitting president”.

“In her opinion, the thorny issues of characterising the judiciary as somewhat foreign, being captured, self serving or serving foreign masters, is worrisome – especially for a minister who has been in government for more than 24 years.

“She has [now] seen it fit to rise to the occasion, saying the constitution is no longer serving its purpose.

“The question should also be asked on whether she has contributed to the agenda of a developmental state during her tenure as minister.

“By now she should have demonstrated that it was all about service delivery and putting people first.”

– brians@citizen.co.za