The political landscape of South Africa, a country celebrated for its triumphant transition from apartheid to a beacon of democracy in Africa, is no stranger to the dramatic interplay of personal ambitions and institutional constraints. This dynamic is encapsulated in the saga of Jacob Zuma, a figure whose career has been as impactful as it has been contentious. At the heart of this saga lies what can aptly be termed the “Zuma dilemma,” a narrative that unfolds at the intersection of unyielding political ambitions and the constitutional boundaries designed to temper them.
Jacob Zuma’s political journey is a testament to resilience and controversy. Rising through the African National Congress (ANC) ranks, Zuma played various pivotal roles in the anti-apartheid struggle, eventually serving as the President of South Africa from 2009 to 2018. Significant achievements marked his presidency but were also shadowed by allegations of corruption and governance challenges. Despite these controversies and having served two terms, the maximum allowed by the South African Constitution, Zuma has expressed aspirations for a third term. This move has ignited widespread debate and speculation.
The crux of the Zuma dilemma lies in the palpable tension between his apparent desire to return to the pinnacle of South African politics and the constitutional prohibitions that stand as formidable barriers to such ambitions. The South African Constitution stipulates a two-term limit for presidents, a provision that embodies the democratic ethos of limiting power to prevent autocracy. Zuma’s aspirations, therefore, not only challenge the letter of the law but also the spirit of democratic governance and accountability that the post-apartheid constitutional framework seeks to uphold. This article will explore the intricate layers of power dynamics, personal motivations, and the broader democratic implications of a potential third term for Zuma.
Jacob Zuma’s Ambitions: Motivations and Intentions
Jacob Zuma’s insatiable hunger for a third term is not an isolated phenomenon in global politics. This desire can be seen as a manifestation of a broader trend among leaders who seek to extend their grip on power beyond conventional limits. Such leaders often resist relinquishing authority, motivated by personal, political, and sometimes financial interests. For Zuma, this drive can be attributed to several factors, including the consolidation of political influence, control over legal and political narratives, and possibly protection from legal challenges related to his stint in the presidency.
Controversies marred Jacob Zuma’s second stint as President of South Africa, as he was recalled from office based on allegations of corruption and governance inefficiencies. Despite these challenges, his ambition for a third term comes with claims of bringing benefits and positive change to the country. Zuma articulated his reasons for wanting to return to leadership when speaking to a congregation at the Nazareth Baptist Church in Ndwedwe, north of Durban. He argued that his early removal by the ANC thwarted his efforts to complete his initiatives, particularly those aimed at alleviating the struggles of the poor. Zuma’s assertion that his ouster resulted from his commitment to solving the impoverished’s problems adds complexity to his political narrative, as he positions himself as a champion of the underprivileged, seeking redemption and an opportunity to “fix things.”
Constitutional Boundaries: The Prohibition of a Third Term
The South African Constitution and its legal framework set clear limitations on the presidency, including the prohibition of serving more than two terms. This is enshrined to ensure a healthy leadership rotation and prevent the consolidation of power in the hands of a single individual indefinitely. The constitution reflects a deliberate choice by the people of South Africa to endorse a democratic system where power is not only separated among branches of government but also limited in its duration within the executive branch.
Jacob Zuma is constitutionally restricted from contesting due to his tumultuous journey through South Africa’s judicial system and political landscape. This began with his refusal to testify at a corruption inquiry covering his nine-year presidency, which led to a 15-month prison sentence for contempt of court in July 2021. Shortly after Zuma’s incarceration, South Africa witnessed violent protests, resulting in over 300 deaths. Within a month of his sentence, Zuma, citing health concerns, was hospitalised and subsequently granted medical parole—a decision later ruled illegal by an appeals court. Despite an appeal from the prison service, South Africa’s Constitutional Court affirmed the need for Zuma to serve his sentence, prompting his return to the Estcourt detention facility. However, upon Zuma’s arrival at Estcourt, Corrections Services announced his almost immediate release due to prison overcrowding as part of a broader “remission process,” according to national commissioner Makgothi Thobakgale.
Amid these legal battles, Zuma’s political career faced its challenges. After separating from the African National Congress (ANC) in December 2023, he founded the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MK), aiming to contest in elections. Nevertheless, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) disqualified him based on his 2021 contempt of court conviction. However, MK spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndlhela indicated the party would challenge this decision amid threats of violence from some party leaders should Zuma be prevented from running.
Implications for South Africa’s Democratic Framework
If Zuma were to find a way around the constitutional restrictions to seek a third term, it could set a dangerous precedent, initiating a domino effect that might encourage future leaders to attempt similar manoeuvres. This would fundamentally challenge the democratic framework of South Africa, potentially leading to an erosion of democratic norms and practices. Democracy in South Africa could be at stake if constitutional and legal standards are disregarded. The implications for accountability and transparency are dire, as the actions of leaders unchecked by constitutional boundaries could lead to increased corruption and abuse of power. This scenario would undoubtedly compromise the overall health of South Africa’s democratic framework, affecting everything from civil liberties to the efficacy of public institutions.
Precedent and Future Leaders
Zuma’s potential return to power under circumstances that violate constitutional term limits could open a Pandora’s box, setting a dangerous precedent for future leadership in South Africa. This move could undermine the legal and moral authority of the Constitution, encouraging future leaders to disregard constitutional limits and safeguards. The prospect of unlimited terms for presidents is tempting for any leader seeking to maintain power. However, this undermines the principles of democratic renewal and competition, which are central to the health and vibrancy of a democracy. Future leaders might be inspired to seek extensions of their terms, thereby weakening the democratic fabric of the nation.
Undermining constitutional term limits could have devastating long-term effects on the stability and integrity of South Africa’s political system. It could increase political instability, as opposition groups and civil society might resist undemocratic moves. Moreover, the international community’s perception of South Africa as a beacon of democratic progress in Africa could be severely damaged.
ANC’s Detachment from the People
There has been a noticeable detachment of South Africans from the ANC in recent years, evident in declining voter turnout and growing public expressions of dissatisfaction. This detachment is partly attributed to unmet economic empowerment, service delivery, and social justice expectations. The party that once symbolised the hope for a democratic, accessible, and equal South Africa now faces criticism for failing to fully realise these aspirations.
The reasons behind the growing public disenchantment with the ANC are multifaceted, including:
Socio-economic concerns: South Africa grapples with high unemployment rates, poverty, and inequality, which have only been exacerbated by global economic pressures and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Allegations of corruption: The ANC has been embroiled in numerous corruption scandals, including those associated with state capture, which have eroded public trust in the party and its leadership.
Failure to deliver on promises: There is a perception that the ANC needs to live up to its promises regarding service delivery, land reform, and economic transformation, contributing to frustration and disillusionment among the electorate.
The integrity and vibrancy of South Africa’s democracy hinge on the steadfast upholding of constitutional principles. These principles are the bedrock upon which the rights and freedoms of all South Africans are built, ensuring that power is exercised responsibly and with accountability. The Zuma saga serves as a potent reminder of the importance of these constitutional safeguards in preventing the erosion of democratic norms.
The Zuma dilemma and the broader issues facing the ANC and South Africa call for reaffirming democratic principles and a reinvigorated commitment to the public good. Only through collective reflection, accountability, and action can South Africa navigate its current challenges and build a future that aligns with the ideals of freedom, justice, and equality that have guided its journey since the end of apartheid.