Zuma Violated Constitution

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

783 corruption charges against him were dropped irrationally.  Says a South African court.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-zuma-to-hear-if-spy-tapes-judgment-will-be-set-aside-20160429

[Georgesoros]

Zuma is another Ruto. You know he is guilty but nothing touches him because he is shrewd.

[Reticent Solipsist]

Zuma is another Ruto. You know he is guilty but nothing touches him because he is shrewd.

One could also make the alternative argument that Zuma is more like Uhuru, who is probably shrewder than Ruto.

See, then it's easier to explain why nothing tars the Boss. It also helps if your chief gatekeeper aka Private Secretary is your nephew. As Jomo would say Siri-Kali.That's how the pros do it.

Ruto, by comparison, bah... plays in the minor leagues -- the bush league -- per baseball parlance.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

South Africa's indigenization continues at a steady clip under Zuma.

South Africa's top anti-corruption official says she fears for her life after learning from an informant that hitmen are being contracted to kill her, her spokeswoman has said.

Public Protector Thuli Madonsela is a leading public figure who scored a major victory when South Africa's top court ruled on March 31 that President Jacob Zuma had violated the constitution by ignoring her instructions to pay back some of the $16m of state money spent upgrading his private home.

The Western Cape province has a reputation for gangsterism and organised crime but her spokeswoman said Madonsela did not know who wanted to kill her.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201605100193.html

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Prince Mashele thinks South Africa is finally making peace with its African heritage as Zuma tightens his grip on power.  Surviving events that in previous times would have brought down governments, even during apartheid.

SA finally African, all thanks to Zuma

In the midst of the political confusion that has gripped our country many people are wondering if we have come to the end of South Africa.

The answer is simple: the thing called an "end" does not exist, not in relation to a country. SA will be there long after Jacob Zuma is gone.

What Zuma has done is to make us come to the realisation that ours is just another African country, not some exceptional country on the southern tip of the African continent.

During the presidency of Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki, some among us used to believe that the black people of SA are better than those of other African countries.

We must all thank Zuma for revealing our true African character; that the idea of rule of law is not part of who we are, and that constitutionalism is a concept far ahead of us as a people.

How else are we to explain the thousands of people who flock to stadiums to clap hands for a president who has violated their country's constitution? Such people have no idea of constitutionalism.

Now that we have reclaimed our place as another African country, we must reflect on and come to terms with our real character, and imagine what our future portends.

In a typical African country, ordinary people don't expect much of politicians, because people get tired of repeated empty promises.

In a typical African country, people have no illusions about the unity of morality and governance. People know that those who have power have it for themselves and their friends and families.

The idea that the state is an instrument for people's development is a Western concept, and has been copied by pockets of Asian countries.

Africans and their leaders don't like to copy from the West. They are happy to remain African, and do things "the African way".

The African way is rule by kings, chiefs and indunas in a setting of unwritten rules. Is there anyone who has seen a book of African customary laws?

The idea that a commoner can raise questions about public money spent on the residence of a king is not African. The ANC MPs who have been defending Zuma are true Africans.

Asking a ruler to be accountable is a foreign - Western - idea. In a situation where there is conflict between a ruler and laws, Africans simply change the laws to protect the ruler. This is why no single white person has called for King Dalindyebo to be released from jail.

The problem with clever blacks is that they think they live in Europe, where ideas of democracy have been refined over centuries.

What we need to do is to come back to reality, and accept that ours is a typical African country. Such a return to reality will give us a fairly good idea of what SA's future might look like.

This country will not look like Denmark. It might look like Nigeria, where anti-corruption crusaders are an oddity.

Being an African country, ours will not look like Germany. SA might look like Kenya, where tribalism drives politics.

People must not entertain the illusion that a day is coming when SA will look like the US. Our future is more on the side of Zimbabwe, where one ruler is more powerful than the rest of the population. Even if Julius Malema were to become president, it would still be the same.

African leaders don't like the idea of an educated populace, for clever people are difficult to govern. Mandela and Mbeki were themselves corrupted by Western education. (Admission: this columnist is also corrupted by such education.)

Zuma remains African. His mentality is in line with Boko Haram. He is suspicious of educated people; what he calls "clever blacks". Remember that Boko Haram means "Against Western Education".

The people who think we have come to the end of SA don't realise that we have actually come to the beginning of a real African country, away from the Western illusions of exceptionalism. Those who are unsettled by this true African character need help. The best we can do for them is to ask them to look north of the Limpopo River, to learn more about governance in Africa.

What makes most people restless about the future of SA is that they have Western models in mind, forgetting that ours is an Africa country.

The idea that a president can resign simply because a court of law has delivered an adverse judgment is Western. Only the Prime Minister of Iceland does that; African rulers will never do that.

Analysed carefully, the notion of SA coming to an "end" is an expression of a Western value system - of accountability, political morality, reason, and so on. All these are lofty ideas of Socrates, Kant, Hegel, and so on. They are not African.

All of us must thank Jacob Zuma for introducing us to the real African Republic of South Africa, not some outpost of European values.

http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2016/05/09/sa-finally-african-all-thanks-to-zuma

[MOON Ki]

Great piece.   I read it twice, as it is obviously intended to be read at two levels.   On the first reading, I just chuckled; on the second reading I reflected on the many serious points she has raised and wants people to think about.   

Why is it that SA is slowly going "the African Way"?    Was this inevitable?   Will a place like Botswana remain as the sole exception?  What inspiration could other African countries have drawn from "South Africa done right"?  Can SA reverse course? Dot, dot, dot.

One of the things I always find amazing whenever I am home is the extent to which everyone is hankering for the "good life" as seen of the West (TV, movies, etc.).   In fact, it is the desire for such a life, and the implied material acquisitions, that drives the worst cases of corruption we see: the worst cases of stealing and grabbing are not by people whose survival depends on it.   It is only in governance, especially when allowances are needed to get around theft from public coffers and the excesses of power, that we insist on an "African Way".   And this goes all the way back to the period of independence:

The first thing that the new African leaders insisted on was that they didn't need "Western democracy", that they would come up with something that was more appropriate for Africa.     What they overlooked is that the Western systems are  the result of working past centuries of social evils and  mayhem.    So we had all sorts of abuses, crimes against humanity, presidents for life, coups, etc.   Then---and Kenya is a good example---we started revising constitutions and the like to have the sorts of checks and balances that the West arrived at in painful ways.    Nevertheless we continue in a similar path: when it comes to the "material enjoyment of life", we see no reason why we are not as "deserving" as those elsewhere and of goods produced in the elsewhere; but in matters of governance (especially in abuses of power or access to power), we insist that there is an "African Way" or that we, seemingly incapable of learning, must go through the same experiences that those we borrow from went through.    And all the while our universities churn out graduates in law, public administration, etc. ... all based on the "Western System" and all of whom we insist are as capable as anyone else.   

Dot, dot, dot.

The relationship between morality and governance comes up twice in the article.   I am unable to understand why it should be a problem, but some exchanges here indicate that it is for some of us.  There seems to be the idea that we can have endless misbehaviour at the top but that, somehow, those at the bottom will overlook that and lead upright lives.

[MOON Ki]

Being an African country, ours will not look like Germany. SA might look like Kenya, where tribalism drives politics.

Ouch!

Anyways .... I did a third reading.   In the first two, I was looking at things from a "South African" angle.  Why did people, both in SA and elsewhere, except that SA would be "different"?   What does the article say about the rest of Africa?  As Americans would say, it's not a pretty picture.    Or something like that ...

[veritas]

Zuma's a pig.

The "Afro" way is tribal. Best exemplified under a socialist model like a Fuedian society in Europe centuries ago or a Cuban society with equitable health and wealth distribution under a selfless regime.

The best of capitalist democracies lead to genocides in poor countries and micro-aggressions and sociopathic tendencies, class differences in rich countries.

Milton is so yesterday.

The African way will always be consequential poverty under the capitalist blanket because global resource distribution favours rich countries. One way to reverse that is war like terrorism. Militia groups among civilian populations drains capitalist security ie. disrupts status quo money trails.

[veritas]

Pan-Africanism, a united Africa was a diplomatic front spearheaded by Gaddaffi in recent times to empower the African way. He was killed by the West when the African Union began to strengthen. Recognizing tribal conglomerates over British colonial protectorates could be one way of resolving tribal animosity. Eg. Separate the Kikuyus to their own nation, Kalenjin to their own nation etc. That way voting isn't fuelled by tribal animosity but like the West reflect conservative vs liberal values.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Great piece.   I read it twice, as it is obviously intended to be read at two levels.   On the first reading, I just chuckled; on the second reading I reflected on the many serious points she has raised and wants people to think about.   

Why is it that SA is slowly going "the African Way"?    Was this inevitable?   Will a place like Botswana remain as the sole exception?  What inspiration could other African countries have drawn from "South Africa done right"?  Can SA reverse course? Dot, dot, dot.

One of the things I always find amazing whenever I am home is the extent to which everyone is hankering for the "good life" as seen of the West (TV, movies, etc.).   In fact, it is the desire for such a life, and the implied material acquisitions, that drives the worst cases of corruption we see: the worst cases of stealing and grabbing are not by people whose survival depends on it.   It is only in governance, especially when allowances are needed to get around theft from public coffers and the excesses of power, that we insist on an "African Way".   And this goes all the way back to the period of independence:

The first thing that the new African leaders insisted on was that they didn't need "Western democracy", that they would come up with something that was more appropriate for Africa.     What they overlooked is that the Western systems are  the result of working past centuries of social evils and  mayhem.    So we had all sorts of abuses, crimes against humanity, presidents for life, coups, etc.   Then---and Kenya is a good example---we started revising constitutions and the like to have the sorts of checks and balances that the West arrived at in painful ways.    Nevertheless we continue in a similar path: when it comes to the "material enjoyment of life", we see no reason why we are not as "deserving" as those elsewhere and of goods produced in the elsewhere; but in matters of governance (especially in abuses of power or access to power), we insist that there is an "African Way" or that we, seemingly incapable of learning, must go through the same experiences that those we borrow from went through.    And all the while our universities churn out graduates in law, public administration, etc. ... all based on the "Western System" and all of whom we insist are as capable as anyone else.   

Dot, dot, dot.

The relationship between morality and governance comes up twice in the article.   I am unable to understand why it should be a problem, but some exchanges here indicate that it is for some of us.  There seems to be the idea that we can have endless misbehaviour at the top but that, somehow, those at the bottom will overlook that and lead upright lives.

The mzansi has always seen himself as a special breed of African; largely justified by the obvious if rapidly narrowing gap that the kaburu, his cruel system aside, was able to create with the otherwise kienyeji run parts of the beloved continent. 

None other Induna Zuma himself is on record ridiculing "Africa" suggesting SA is not part of that realm.

President Jacob Zuma was speaking at the ANC's Manifesto Forum at Wits University on Monday night when he was questioned about the wisdom and logic of the e-tolling system that will soon be implemented. "We can't think like Africans in Africa. It's not some national road in Malawi." What the president meant by this has been a subject of debate on Twitter, with some claiming it was arrogant and classist.

http://mg.co.za/article/2013-10-22-zuma-dont-think-like-an-african-pay-up-for-e-tolls

That's the type of background for Prince Mashele's article.  Africa's own "exceptional country".

There is angst, especially in the white minority, but also a portion of the black middle class, at the breakneck speed Zuma is embracing "African" values.  The masses remain ANC voting zombies engendering a feeling of utter helplessness.

Botswana has somehow managed a semblance of alien organization though it lacks the punch of South Africa.

[RV Pundit]

South Africa had this coming. I won't lay the blame on Zuma. I lay the blame on the AVERAGE South Africans. Average RSA intelligence,education,exposure,name it is not very different from sub-saharan africa or latin america or some parts of Asia. What camouflage RSA is a tiny white majority that is holding up (and down) the country.

I have been to Namibia and I suspect it more or less like Bostwana. A huge desert with little towns while the majority are hunters & gathers running around in the desert wilderness. Those are not true african countries. It like carving a little country out of northern kenya desert. You can make it anything you want.

It is very lame & intellectually lazy to blame this on Zuma while the majority of RSA is an ANC supporter not any different from TZ ccm supporter. They are going to support ANC or KANU or CCM until they go the kenya or nigeria way...of tribalism.What will delay tribalism..is probably the fear of white rule and of course it take few more years for real democracy to flourish there.

[Reticent Solipsist]

Folks, Zuma was preceded by the great Mandela and the passable Thabo Mbeki. But not once have I heard corruption mentioned alongside their names.

On Mandela, here's a man who died with a wealth estimated at anywhere from $6 million to $8 million or thereabouts -- money whose origin Mandela could account for, but paltry by the standards of our money making alchemists, the Kenyatta's, Kanyotus, Ndegwas, Mois, etc. Put differently, Mandela could easily have made $1 billion off his name alone - including from wealthy benefactors in the West, Asia, the Middle East or pretty much anywhere in this world. He was a bona fide hero - not contrived.

Now enter the corrupt Zuma. Instead of emulating Mandela or Mbeki or the ascetic Nyerere, he's chosen to emulate the most rapacious of Africa's kleptocrats, the likes of Jomo Kenyatta, Mobutu, Sani Abacha and Dos Santos of Angola.

Zuma, welcome to the pantheon of African heroes -- you're in good company.

[MOON Ki]

Folks, Zuma was preceded by the great Mandela and the passable Thabo Mbeki. But not once have I heard corruption mentioned alongside their names.

Exactly.   Pundit implies that the average SA voter is as sheepish or as robotic as his/her counterpart in Kenya and other parts of Africa.  If that is so---and I have no particular reason to disagree with him---then leadership is even more crucial: sheep should be properly led (whence "good shepherd") and robots need good programmers (an active industry).   

But what I am really curious about is the notion that such a descent---into the 3rd or 4th or whatever world it's called these days---was inevitable for South Africa.   (As RV Pundit "delicately" puts it: "South Africa had this coming".)   Why can we not pick up from wherever the oppressor or "oppressor" left and move on positively, forwards and upwards?

[RV Pundit]

You need to read about the law of averages. Or in statistic the idea of a normal distribution. Yeah one man can pull the country up but another can similarly pull it down..all these are temporary shocks..but utlimately the country will move with majority in tow. Trump or Zuma if he became US potus...cannot pull the country down by any serious notch. The average America is far more educated, more intelligent, more sophisticated and more informed.

The law of averages is a layman's term for a belief that the statistical distribution of outcomes among members of a small sample must reflect the distribution of outcomes across the population as a whole.

This is way countries in sub-sahara are all averagely there--and they will all move along--bar a few outliers. South Africa majority blacks are like fellow sub-saharan africa in all indicators -wealth, level of education, etc etc.

Exactly.   Pundit implies that the average SA voter is as sheepish or as robotic as his/her counterpart in Kenya and other parts of Africa.  If that is so---and I have no particular reason to disagree with him---then leadership is even more crucial: sheep should be properly led (whence "good shepherd") and robots need good programmers (an active industry).   

But what I am really curious about is the notion that such a descent---into the 3rd or 4th or whatever world it's called these days---was inevitable for South Africa.   (As RV Pundit "delicately" puts it: "South Africa had this coming".)   Why can we not pick up from wherever the oppressor or "oppressor" left and move on positively, forwards and upwards?

[RV Pundit]

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Plot-to-influence-Chief-Justice-succession/-/1056/3232996/-/i7g8yrz/-/index.html

[Nefertiti]

South Africa Court Rules Parliament Failed to Hold President Zuma Accountable
https://www.voanews.com/a/south-africa-court-zuma-parliament/4184009.html