Here is the difficulty for President Jacob Zuma to deliver the State of the Nation (SONA) for himself; the ruling ANC; and the society at large.
 |
| Photo Cred: The Citizen |
The main purpose of the state of the nation address, is to galvanise, inspire and motivate society to work together for the greater good of all. In this regard, both the content and the one who delivers such a speech are crucial. The content of the speech needs to be both visionary, as well as operational. In the latter, practically articulate the plans of government, and how these will be carried out, and intended outcomes delivered.
Beyond this, the person who presents the speech, must carry the necessary leadership aura, substance and integrity associated with such a national task. This particular leader, must have demonstrated that he, and the collective leadership that he leads, have the necessary capacity and acumen to lead society to higher levels of prosperity.
In this regard, both president Zuma as an individual leader, the cabinet that he leads, and the ANC as the ruling party must carry the necessary leadership integrity, and be convincing in their work.
This is where the challenge lies:
On president Zuma, he has been found wanting on several leadership aspects in the last two years or so. These include the following: in three instances, a call from his own political party to relieve him of his leadership role has been made. This has been made within the NEC which is the highest decision-making body of the ANC. In short, a significant part of his co-leaders have no faith in him as a state president. Add to this, about 25 ANC members of parliament voted for his removal as state president last year.
Then the high court judges have determined that he was conflicted from making crucial appointments such as that of the National Director of Public Prosecutions, and from choosing the judge to lead the commission of enquiry on state capture affairs. The subtle message here, questions his fitness to presidentially preside over state affairs.
In the midst of all this, Zuma, out of the state capture inquiry terms of reference that he drafted, is the main figure in the substance of the inquiry. Linked to this, is the centrality of his son, Duduzane Zuma, and the president’s business friends, the Guptas.
Right now, the National Assembly is working on impeachment rules and processes over the president’s poor governance oversight on the Nkandla project. This, after the constitutional court found that he failed in his presidential office obligations, and that the National Assembly also failed to undertake the necessary disciplinary processes.
All the above, indicates that Zuma’s presidential acumen, is doubted substantively from within his own political party; this has also been replicated by the work of state institutions established to safeguard democratic conduct and accountability. These are: the office of the public protector; and the judiciary. Zuma was also compelled to pay for the litigation over state capture review. Essentially, meaning that he abused the judicial process that he is constitutionally expected to protect and champion at all costs.
With all these white clouds hanging over president Zuma’s head, it makes it difficult to figure Zuma addressing society on its strategic future. The state of the nation address, has to inspire, motivate, and build society’s confidence in a progressive desired future. To this extent, the leader that carries out this task, must be fit for that purpose, and so is the collective that he leads.
In this instance, a number of ministers are implicated in the state capture inquiry. Most of the state owned enterprises have seen a degeneration in matters of governance under several ministers. Currently, Social Development Minister is facing an inquiry to determine why she must not be held personally liable over legal expenses for the debacle over the provision of social grants last year. These, among other issues, adds to a trust and confidence deficit, not only on Zuma as an individual, but also the collective he leads.
The broader ANC leadership at the National Executive Committee, and the top six level, cannot be absolved from the degeneration of the substance of the SONA. These two decision making structures of the ANC, have in the last few years, failed to hold their executive deployees accountable for the errors made both at the national Assembly, and government levels.
In many instances, the opposition has stepped up to resort to the judiciary for decisions that the ANC could have taken on its executive deployees at the party political level. ANC members in the National Assembly failed to deal with the Nkandla matter until Zuma, under legal pressure, “offered” to pay back the relevant monies. Similarly, the party has not acted on state capture, until the opposition resorted to the courts, for what the ANC could have done from Luthuli House.
Once again, the opposition has now taken the lead over why president Zuma is not the appropriate person to present the state of the nation address. Once again, the ANC, at an organisational level, has failed to provide leadership over its executive deployee – the state president.
In the process, the substance of the state of the nation address is compromised. It has lost value and substance. The integrity of the event is highly questionable. Thus, whilst the whole nation ought to be looking forward to the strategic road map for the future as president by the state president, many will actually be looking forward to the theatrics of the day. Consequently, the content of the speech, will be drowned in the questionable integrity environment of the entire event.
On the face value, the problem may be presumed to be president Zuma. To the extent that Zuma was until recently ANC president, and now just state president, he is at fault. As a leader, he ought and still needs to play that leadership agency role to ensure the integrity of both the ANC, the state he manages, and therefore, uphold the substance of SONA. However, the entire ANC leadership collective is guilty for the degeneration of the SONA into the farcical event that it has degenerated into.
The irony though, this SONA, ought to be that official definitive strategic event signalling that the country is turning the corner from a decline, to socio-economic reengineering for the better. But then, bickering in the ruling party leadership, concludes that the wheel is turning – but on the same spot!
Hlophe is Governance specialist, at the Unisa School of Governance. He writes in his own capacity.
Twitter handle: @KunjaloD