South Africa’s president survives vote to oust him

President Jacob Zuma... Many ANC members have blamed Zuma's corruption scandals for the party's poor performance in local elections in August in which it lost the key municipalities of Johannesburg and Pretoria to the main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance. — President Jacob Zuma… Many ANC members have blamed Zuma’s corruption scandals for the party’s poor performance in local elections in August in which it lost the key municipalities of Johannesburg and Pretoria to the main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance.

JOHANNESBURG (AP) — President Jacob Zuma escaped a move to oust him as the leader of South Africa by senior members of his ruling party, it was announced Tuesday.

A motion to dismiss Zuma, 74, over a string of corruption allegations since he came to office in 2009 was introduced at a meeting of the National Executive Committee, or NEC, of the African National Congress in Pretoria on Saturday.

The majority of the ANC’s 80 executive committee members voted to keep Zuma in office, the party’s secretary general Gwede Mantashe told journalists in Johannesburg on Tuesday afternoon.

“Following honest, robust, candid and at times difficult discussion, the NEC did not support the call for the president to step down,” said Mantashe.

“All members of the NEC had the opportunity to raise in the meeting the issues they feel are hurting the movement and the country,” he said.

Fresh from his victory, Zuma left Tuesday for Cuba to attend the funeral of Fidel Castro.

Many ANC members have blamed Zuma’s corruption scandals for the party’s poor performance in local elections in August in which it lost the key municipalities of Johannesburg and Pretoria to the main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance. It was the worst performance for the ANC, once led by Nelson Mandela, since it won power at the end of apartheid in 1994.

Three weeks ago Zuma survived a no-confidence motion in Parliament that was raised by the Democratic Alliance after the state corruption watchdog issued a report which alleged that he may have abused his position to win state contracts for his friends, the wealthy Gupta family.

Zuma also faces the reinstatement of 783 corruption charges for an arms deal more than a decade ago. His term as the ANC’s leader expires in December 2017.

African National Congress suffers worst-ever election results

South African President Jacob Zuma spoke about the election on Saturday as protesters stood silently with signs referring to his acquittal on rape charges in 2006.

JOHANNESBURG — South Africa’s ruling party suffered its worst election setback since taking power at the end of apartheid a generation ago, with the African National Congress losing the capital, Pretoria, and its surrounding Tshwane metropolitan area. But it won a tight race for the country’s biggest city, Johannesburg, election authorities reported Saturday night.

The opposition Democratic Alliance, which named its first black party leader last year, made a strong move out of its stronghold in the city of Cape Town, winning in three of the country’s six largest municipalities. With no party reaching a majority in Johannesburg or Tshwane, the possible formation of coalition governments is the next challenge.

Scandals around President Jacob Zuma came back to haunt him even as he praised a peaceful vote. As he spoke on national television, four women stood up in front of him, silently facing the crowd and holding signs that appeared to refer to his acquittal for rape in 2006. Zuma didn’t appear to respond.

The election losses have threatened two decades of dominance by the ANC, the former antiapartheid movement.

Since South Africa’s first all-race election in 1994, the ANC has had widespread support on the strength of its successful fight against white-minority rule, while bringing basic amenities to many people. But its hold has been weakened by corruption scandals and a stagnant economy that has frustrated the urban middle class, while poor communities demand better services in a country with one of the highest inequality rates in the world.

‘‘Election after election, the ANC has hung on to its past glory and kept its place in the hearts of most South Africans. . . . This time round, though, it’s not enough,’’ the Mail & Guardian newspaper said in an editorial. On social media, South Africans mocked Zuma’s recent claim that the ANC would rule ‘‘until Jesus comes back.’’

In a brief address shortly before final results were announced, Zuma, 74, thanked South Africans for a vote he called largely peaceful, free, and fair.

‘‘Our democracy is maturing,’’ he said. ‘‘Let us get back to work and build our country together.’’

The election was notable for its peaceful power shift away from an entrenched government in Africa, where some leaders have been in office for decades. In neighboring Zimbabwe, President Robert Mugabe, 92, has kept control since independence in 1980 with disputed elections and crackdowns on dissent.

Before this election, the ANC had never lost a major black-majority municipality. Now it has lost two, including Nelson Mandela Bay, named for the ANC’s star and the country’s first black president.

The Democratic Alliance already runs the country’s second largest city, Cape Town, the only major municipality where blacks are in the minority among white and mixed-race residents. The party, which has roots in the antiapartheid movement, has declared that its brand is good governance.

‘‘For far too long, the ANC has governed South Africa with absolute impunity,’’ the party’s leader, Mmusi Maimane, 36, told reporters earlier Saturday. He said the idea that his party was a white one has been ‘‘completely shattered.’’

The ANC received 53 percent of votes across the country, its lowest percentage ever;the Democratic Alliance got 26 percent.

The results for the ANC could put pressure on Zuma to leave office before his mandate ends in 2019, political analysts said.

South Africa’s EFF MPs expelled for heckling Jacob Zuma

A brawl broke out in the South African parliament on Tuesday as security officers were ordered to forcibly remove opposition MPs. Several punches were thrown as the left-wing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) were expelled after trying to stop President Jacob Zuma speaking. In March a court ruled Mr Zuma violated the constitution by failing to pay back public money used on his mansion. It is the second brawl in parliament this month.

Security guards were ordered by the speaker to eject the people who were being disruptive. Guards surrounded the EFF MPs who were dressed in their trademark red boiler suits. Objects, including bottles of water and a hard hat, were thrown as the guards tried to wrestle the MPs out of the chamber.

The EFF has denounced Mr Zuma as an “illegitimate” ruler who should step down. South Africa’s highest court, the Constitutional Court, ruled that Mr Zuma had violated the constitution when he failed to repay government money used to upgrade his private home in the rural area of Nkandla.

About 20 EFF members, who were wrestled from their seats by plain-clothed guards on Tuesday, refused to let Zuma speak and shouted down Baleka Mbete, the speaker of the National Assembly. The EFF argued that Zuma was not fit to address the house after recent court decisions against the president before adding that they would repeat their disruptive actions until he resigned.

In a second case, at the end of April, a court said that Mr Zuma should be charged with corruption. The case is related to a multi-billion dollar arms deal the government negotiated in 1999. Mr Zuma denies any wrongdoing, and says he will continue to “shepherd” the nation. His term is due to end in 2019. In his first appearance after this court ruling at the beginning of May, a brawl also broke out as EFF members were evicted for heckling.

Why Does Thuli Madonsela, South Africa’s Public Prosecutor, Fear for Her Life?

Few women command the same public respect in South Africa as Thuli Madonsela.

Madonsela, 53, holds the post of public protector in South Africa , an independent watchdog tasked with investigating government corruption and holding the most powerful people to account. South African President Jacob Zuma appointed Madonsela to the role in 2009 for a seven-year term, due to conclude in October.

Zuma may well regret that appointment. Madonsela’s highest-profile case has been the investigation of Zuma’s misuse of state funds in improving his sprawling residence at Nkandla, in South Africa’s KwaZulu-Natal province. She authored a 2014 report titled Secure in Comfort , numbering more than 400 pages, concluding that the president had “benefited unduly” from the upgrades—which included a swimming pool and amphitheater and totaled an estimated 246 million rand (worth $23 million at the time)—and should be made to repay funds spent on non-essential security upgrades.

Prior to the 2014 report’s release—which came less than two months ahead of a general election that Zuma won convincingly—South African police reportedly threatened to arrest Madonsela, arguing that the report would constitute a breach of the president’s security. During the two years following its publication, Madonsela was ignored or insulted by the ruling African National Congress (ANC). Deputy defense minister Kebby Maphatsoe accused her of being an agent of the CIA , while former national police commissioner and ANC national executive committee member Bheki Cele said she must “stop acting like she is God.”

Madonsela was finally vindicated in March, however, when the country’s highest court ruled that Zuma had failed to uphold the constitution by ignoring Madonsela’s report. In its ruling, the Constitutional Court praised Madonsela and her office as “an embodiment of a biblical David” and Madonsela herself welcomed the judgement as having “restored hope in the constitutional dream.”

Madonsela’s public advocacy against corruption has earned her enemies, however, as she claimed to have been notified of a bounty against her life. The public protector told South Africa’s Sunday Times that she received a text message on April 1 from a trusted informant, telling her that a gang leader in the Western Cape region had been contracted to have her assassinated. Madonsela said she is “traumatized” by the plot, which she believes to be authentic, and has stopped jogging in the mornings as a security precaution. The anonymous informant also confirmed that 740,000 rand ($49,000) had changed hands for the hit, which was reportedly planned for May and would be made to look like a car accident.

The opposition Democratic Alliance party, led by Mmusi Maimane, has called on the South African Police Service to fully investigate the allegations, saying that public officials like Madonsela cannot “have threats made on their lives for acting in a manner that is too independent in an effort to root out government corruption.” The ANC is yet to comment publicly and was not immediately available when contacted by Newsweek . There is no evidence of a link between the Nkandla investigation and the alleged death threats against Madonsela, who has said she does not know the identity of those threatening her.

The incident highlights the costs that come with speaking out against corruption in a violent and sometimes unstable society like South Africa. It is likely that whoever replaces Madonsela come October will take on her mantle with more than a hint of trepidation.

South Africa: Julius Malema vows to seize white-owned land

Malema, clad in the EFF's signature red overalls and beret, made many promises from free land, water and electricity for the poor to flushing toilets in all homes as he campaigned ahead of municipal elections in August. — Malema, clad in the EFF’s signature red overalls and beret, made many promises from free land, water and electricity for the poor to flushing toilets in all homes as he campaigned ahead of municipal elections in August.

The leader of South Africa’s opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party has launched his party’s campaign for the upcoming local elections, promising to rescue citizens from poverty, unemployment and corrupt government.

Around 40,000 people turned up at Orlando Stadium in Soweto on Saturday displaying massive support for fiery EFF leader Julius Malema’s promises to seize white-owned land without compensation and nationalise the banks.

The huge turnout was a shot across the bows of the ANC, which failed to fill a similar stadium during the launch of its own manifesto in the coastal city of East London two weeks ago.

“We are not chasing the whites away. We are saying you have too much land. We want you here in South Africa, but 80 percent of the land belongs to us,” Malema told the crowd.

The white minority still holds the vast majority of farmland as well as a disproportionate share of the country’s wealth.

The EFF is capitalising on black discontent over the perceived lack of change under the ANC government since the end of apartheid 22 years ago.

Campaign promises

Malema, clad in the EFF’s signature red overalls and beret, made many promises from free land, water and electricity for the poor to flushing toilets in all homes as he campaigned ahead of municipal elections in August.

“We want black communities to be like white communities,” he told the enthusiastic crowd.

The ANC, which has ruled since its iconic leader Nelson Mandela took power in 1994, showed in 2014 national elections that it still had overwhelming support.

However, it has been hard hit by a series of scandals involving President Jacob Zuma and some commentators predict it could lose a couple of major municipalities in the upcoming vote.

The EFF was founded 2013 by Malema after he was thrown out as the leader of the ANC’s youth wing.

In national elections less than a year later it won more than a million votes, taking 25 seats in parliament and becoming the third largest party behind the centrist Democratic Alliance, which holds 89 seats.

This will be the first time the EFF has contested local elections, where issues such as housing, service delivery, poverty and unemployment rank high on voters’ lists of complaints.

South African court rules Zuma must face corruption charges

By Amogelang Mbatha and Paul Vecchiatto | Bloomberg

South African court ruled that the decision by prosecutors to drop a corruption case against President Jacob Zuma seven years ago was irrational and should be set aside, opening the way for the 783 charges against him to be reinstated.

Then acting National Director of Public Prosecutions Mokotedi Mpshe was under pressure and made an “irrational decision” to dismiss the charges in April 2009, ignoring the importance of his oath of office to act independently and without fear or favor, Judge Aubrey Ledwaba said at the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on Friday, citing the ruling by a full bench of judges. Zuma should face the charges in the indictment, he said.

“It’s not the sort of decision that’s going to be easy to overturn on appeal, because it seems to me, it is so well-reasoned,” James Grant, an attorney at the South African High Court, said by phone from Johannesburg. “It’s a very powerful judgment because its a unanimous decision by three judges saying that abuse of process is not something that the prosecution service may rely on.”

The ruling intensifies pressure on the governing African National Congress, which is fighting off increased calls from opposition parities, churches and civil-rights organizations to dismiss Zuma as the country prepares for local government elections on Aug. 3. The 74-year-old leader has been dogged by scandals even before he took office and now has to face an economy growing at the slowest pace since the 2009 recession and the risk of credit downgrade to junk.

“The ANC’s woes continue in the run up to the local government elections and they will have an even harder time managing their image after having decided not to recall him,” University of the Western Cape Head of Political Studies Cherrel Africa said by phone from Cape Town.

Last month, South Africa’s top court found that Zuma, had “failed to uphold, defend and respect the constitution” over his handling of a graft ombudsman report into security upgrades at his private rural residence, which found his family had unduly benefited from the improvements. That ruling followed in the wake of allegations that his friends, the Gupta family, offered senior Cabinet positions to members of the ANC. The Guptas have denied any wrongdoing and Zuma has referred questions to them, saying only he has the authority to appoint ministers.

Prosecutors had spent eight years investigating allegations that Zuma took 4.07 million rand ($287,000) in bribes from arms dealers, and had brought charges of fraud, corruption and racketeering against him. Mpshe decided to drop the case on grounds that taped phone calls indicated the chief prosecutor was using the case against Zuma to frustrate his efforts to win control of the ANC from Thabo Mbeki. Zuma, who was elected ANC president in 2007, became president of South Africa in May 2009 and won a second and final term in 2014.

The Democratic Alliance, the country’s largest opposition party, has been fighting ever since to have the charges reinstated.

“This finding by the court is an overwhelming victory for the rule of law,” DA leader Mmusi Maimane said in an e-mailed statement. “The National Prosecuting Authority must now immediately continue with the 783 charges of corruption so that President Zuma can finally have his day in court.”

The National Prosecuting Authority will study the judgment before deciding what action to take, spokesman Luvuyo Mfaku said by phone. Zuma has noted the decision and “will give consideration to the judgment and its consequences and the remedies available in terms of our law,” the presidency said in an e-mailed statement.

“The court did not deal with the merits of any allegations against President Zuma nor did it make any finding declaring guilt on any matter,” the ANC said. “Today’s judgment was solely a judicial review of an administrative action taken by the NPA as allowed for in our law. This matter has dragged on for close to a decade and the ANC is pleased therefore that it now appears closer to resolution.”

Criticism of Zuma’s government has intensified since December, when his decision to replace his respected finance minister, Nhlanhla Nene, with a little-known lawmaker sparked a selloff of the rand and the nation’s bonds. A special South African police unit, known as the Hawks, is investigating corruption allegations against the Gupta family, who are in business with Zuma’s son, and probing whether the Guptas have any influence on government business.

“President Zuma has jokingly said that he looks forward to his day in court to answer those charges. Well now that day is getting closer,” Bantu Holomisa, leader of minor opposition party, the United Democratic Movement, said by phone from Mthatha. “The ANC will have to seriously consider what it will mean to the country or to their party to have a sitting president in court answering charges and thereby taking his attention away from running the country.”

South Africa’s Julius Malema warns Zuma government

1067c214a6c6c28ff0c9e54dde61098f — Malema is the commander-in-chief of the Economic Freedom Fighters, an opposition party he founded in 2013 after being expelled from the ANC, where he had served as president of the Youth League.

South African politician Julius Malema says the opposition “will run out of patience very soon and we will remove this government through the barrel of a gun” if the ruling African National Congress (ANC) continues to respond violently to peaceful protests.

Malema is the commander-in-chief of the Economic Freedom Fighters, an opposition party he founded in 2013 after being expelled from the ANC, where he had served as president of the Youth League.

The exchange, in Sunday’s episode of Talk To Al Jazeera, began when Jonah Hull asked Malema how far he was willing to go in his “war” against President Jacob Zuma and reminded him of his 2014 threat to make the entire Gauteng province ungovernable.

“We have the capability to mobilise our people and fight physically,” said Malema.

“That’s not befitting of a government in waiting, is it?” Hull asked.

“We know for a fact that Gauteng ANC rigged elections here,” replied Malema.

“We know for a fact that they lost Johannesburg and they lost Gauteng. But we still accepted it. But they must know that we are not going to do that this year. We are not going to accept.

“Part of the revolutionary duty is to fight and we are not ashamed if the need arises for us to take up arms and fight. We will fight. This regime must respond peacefully to our demands and must respond constitutionally to our demands.

“And if they are going to respond violently – like they did in the township of Alexandra, just outside Johannesburg, when people said these results do not reflect the outcome of our votes, they sent the army to go and intimidate our people. We are not going to stand back. Zuma is not going to use the army to intimidate us. We are not scared of the army. We are not scared to fight. We will fight.”

Hull asked Malema to clarify this: “When you say you are willing to take up arms, that’s what you mean?”

“Literally,” Malema said.

“Against the government?” Hull asked.

“Yeah, literally. I mean it literally. We are not scared. We are not going to have a government that disrespects us,” Malema said

“We are a very peaceful organisation and we fight our battles through peaceful means, through the courts, through parliament, through mass moblisation.

“We do that peacefully. But at times, government gets tempted to respond to such with violence. They beat us up in parliament and they send soliders to places like Alexandra where people are protesting. We will run out of patience very soon and we will remove this government through the barrel of a gun.”

Earlier, Malema had denied that Zuma was his primary concern.

“We are not waged in a war against Zuma and the ANC. We are waging a war against white monopoly capital. Zuma is not our enemy. The ANC is not our enemy. They are standing in our way to crushing white monopoly capital, which has stolen our land, which controls the wealth of our country. “As we are in the process of crushing the white monopoly capital, there will be some of those irritations that we have to deal with. Zuma represents such an irritation; the ANC represents such an irritation.”

South Africa is holding municipal elections in August.

South Africa: ANC backs Zuma ahead of impeachment vote

African National Congress (ANC) secretary Gwede Mantashe addresses the media in Johannesburg, April 1. The ANC offered its backing to President Jacob Zuma ahead of a parliamentary debate on whether the president should be impeached.

BY CONOR GAFFEY | Newsweek/

South Africa’s governing party have backed President Jacob Zuma, ahead of an upcoming vote to impeach him.

The motion to remove Zuma from office—which is being spearheaded by the main opposition party Democratic Alliance (DA)—came after South Africa’s top court ruled that Zuma had failed to uphold the constitution in a scandal relating to state-funded improvements on his homestead in Nkandla, in the coastal province of KwaZulu-Natal.

The Constitutional Court ruling concerned Zuma’s failure to heed a 2014 report by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela, which found that the president had “benefited unduly” from upgrades to his home—including a swimming pool and cattle ranch—that cost an estimated 246 million rand ($23 million at the time) and that the president should pay back some of the funds. Zuma apologized live on television on Friday for the “frustration and confusion” the Nkandla scandal had caused and said he would comply with the court’s ruling.

After meeting in Cape Town on Monday, top ANC officials accepted Zuma’s apology and offered the president their full support. ANC General Secretary Gwede Mantashe said that the party wanted to see the Constitutional Court ruling “implemented to the letter” but insisted that the ruling did not mean that the president had broken his oath of office, according to South Africa’s Times Live news site.

Veteran ANC figures, including Ahmed Kathrada —who was jailed alongside Nelson Mandela in 1964 for trying to overthrow the apartheid government—have called on Zuma to resign in the wake of the scandal. Mantashe said that the ANC would engage with dissident voices in the party in the wake of the decision to back Zuma.

The motion to impeach Zuma is to be debated in South Africa’s Parliament on Tuesday, but is unlikely to pass due to the ANC’s massive majority—Zuma’s party controls 249 out of 400 seats in the National Assembly and a two-thirds majority is required by the opposition for the motion to pass. DA leader Mmusi Maimane told Newsweek that ANC assembly members must stand “in defense of the constitution” and vote to impeach Zuma.

Zuma’s potential impeachment gained traction on social media on Tuesday, with numerous South Africans calling for the president to be removed from his post:

How South Africa’s constitutional court put Zuma in his place

BY GARETH NEWHAM | Newsweek/

Jacob Zuma's homestead Nkandla in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, January 21, 2014. South Africa's highest court has ruled that Zuma should pay back some of the state money spent upgrading his home. MARCO LONGARI/AFP/GETTY IMAGES — Jacob Zuma’s homestead Nkandla in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, January 21, 2014. South Africa’s highest court has ruled that Zuma should pay back some of the state money spent upgrading his home.
MARCO LONGARI/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

“The President failed to uphold, defend and respect the Constitution.” With those words, Chief Justice Mogoeng Thomas Reetsang Mogoeng of the South Africa Constitutional Court finally ruled on the biggest of many presidential scandals since Jacob Zuma came to power in 2009.

The court ruling related to the failure of Zuma to adhere to the findings of the public protector, Advocate Thuli Madonsela, that he breached his ethical responsibility with regards to the excessive expenditure of public money on his private homestead in Nkandla and should repay a portion of it. An amount of 246 million rand ($23 million at the time) was used to enhance security and upgrade Zuma’s residence—which including the installation of a swimming pool and ampitheater—resulted in it becoming one of the most expensive homes in a country where more than half the population lives on 779 rand ($53) per month.

The roots of the saga started in 1999, when Zuma was appointed as deputy president of South Africa. Soon after, he began developing his rural estate near Nkandla in northern KwaZulu Natal, a province on South Africa’s east coast. His financial advisor at the time, Schabir Shaik, assisted with the financing of the project. Shaik was eventually convicted of being in a corrupt relationship with Zuma and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment in 2005.

Fortunately for Zuma, the political winds were changing at the time. Then-President Thabo Mbeki, who was increasingly seen as intolerant and aloof, had become unpopular within the African National Congress (ANC) and its alliance partners South African Communist Party (SACP) and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU). Fired by Mbeki and facing corruption charges himself, Zuma had little option but to go for broke and challenge Mbeki for presidency of the ANC. He partly achieved this by presenting himself as a “people’s president” and building support from ANC structures such as the Youth League and other political leaders whom Mbeki had alienated.

This strategy succeeded, and he was elected as the ANC president at the party’s five-yearly National Conference in 2007. Shortly before the 2009 national elections, the then-acting head of the National Prosecuting Authority Mokotedi Mpshe withdrew the 783 criminal charges of corruption, fraud, money laundering and racketeering facing Zuma. Following the ANC’s election win in 2009, Zuma became the president of South Africa.

Zuma quickly used his presidential authority to consolidate his power across the party and the state. He appointed people he believed would owe him allegiance to powerful positions in security and other key state agencies. In this way he was able to dispense patronage to loyalists and target people he perceived as enemies.

Recently, however, Zuma has come under increasing pressure. Various senior ANC party members have publicly alleged that the Guptas—a wealthy business family that are Zuma’s personal friends and benefactors to a number of his immediate family members—have been able to influence presidential decisions, including the appointment of cabinet ministers. This resulted in senior ANC stalwarts calling for Zuma to step down.

Zuma’s term of office as president is due to end in 2019. However, this Constitutional Court ruling has provided fresh impetus to growing calls for Zuma to either step down or be removed by the ANC much earlier. The problem facing the country is that Zuma is still very powerful within the ANC. Despite the court’s ruling, key structures such as the ANC Youth league and Women’s Leaguequickly released public statements after the Constitutional Court ruling expressing their full support for him.

If Zuma threatens to fight against any internal attempts to remove him, it is likely to result in deepening the already severe divisions within the ANC and its alliance partners. Given that highly-contested local government elections will take place later this year, there is unlikely to be the stomach for this type of fight. Moreover, Zuma is in a tight spot. A court ruling on rationality of the withdrawal of the criminal charges against him in 2009 will be out later in 2016, and if he loses they could be reinstated. There is far too much at stake for Zuma, a man who has consistently put his personal interests ahead of his party and the ANC, to leave power prematurely.

It is likely that the ANC will try and manage this internally to prevent additional damage to the party. It will most likely be the outcome of the 2016 local government elections that will determine Zuma’s fate. If the ANC loses substantial support, Zuma’s exit is likely to happen in the relatively near future. If the ANC manages to retain their substantial majority, Zuma is likely to stay until the end of his term of office. Whatever the outcome, South Africa’s Constitutional Court has reaffirmed its supremacy over a rapacious political elite.

Gareth Newham is the head of the Governance, Crime and Justice Division at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), an African security thinktank based in Pretoria. The ISS tweets @issafrica.

Campaign promises

Like Us On Facebook