The word "Constitution" appears in the title "It's about YOU, our Constitution and our Country", which heads the document issued as the declaration of the South African National Convention meeting at Sandton in Johannesburg on the 1st of November. The word "constitution" appears another eight times in what is not a long document (see here).

The preamble to this document states that the responsibility of those present is to "protect and defend the Constitution". In capital letters, its first article emphasises "THE SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION".

In a subsequent clause, the declaration "strongly" rejects the "implied threat to the rule of law in the behaviour and actions of certain political players in our country".

It states that the convenors seek to mobilize all South Africans "in defending our democracy and the constitution". It emphasises the "Constitutional tenet" which "asserts that all citizens are equal before the law" and resolves to "defend the right of equality before the law", as well as the "right to freedom of association, of speech and free political activity".

The phrase "defend our democracy" occurs again in a later paragraph.

The document calls for "electoral reform" to allow for "more direct and diverse electoral structures and process". It calls for a major amendment to the Constitution of 1994, resulting in a new electoral law in which "all the public representatives must be elected directly to improve public accountability".

These are the main points in the document. Such a subject demands the most serious thought.

The main point is, the drafters of this document are either wrong or they are right when they state that there is an "implied threat" to the Constitution and the rule of law, coming from "certain political players", and that there is a need to "defend our democracy". Supremacy of the constitution is the top subject in any constitutional state. It points to the prime issue in the life or death of the polity itself. It was the subject on which the United States of America embarked on a civil war under the presidency of Abraham Lincoln nearly 150 years ago. It makes every issue in dispute between the two candidates in the US presidential election last week look like a tea party.

Readers will need to make up their own minds as to whether the authors of this document are right or wrong, when these individuals argue - in effect - that the gains of almost one hundred years of struggle in South Africa for a democratic polity are under threat, after a bare 14 years of universal franchise, for which so much blood, sweat, toil and tears was spilled.

If the authors of this document are right, then the country would indeed be in peril.

It is not the purpose of this short summary to argue one way or the other on this question. Readers should take time carefully and quietly to come to their own conclusions. This is their prime duty as citizens of the Republic.

I have only two further points to add.

Firstly, the authors of this document are either in a position to know what they are talking about, when they make such a serious allegation about an "implied threat" to the country coming from "certain political players"; or they are not. The question is, are the authors of this allegation in a position to make a sober and reliable judgement as to the reality of the existence of such a threat? One notes that until less than a year ago, the authors of this document and the "political players" they refer to were leaders of the same political party, and had worked together at top level in the country for years.

Secondly: whatever the past political performance of the authors of this document, this allegation is motivated principally either by prejudice and the party game of factional and personal political advantage - or, despite the reality or the possibility of factional and personal issues, and past record, the allegation is true.

If it is true, then the country really is in danger.

Click here to sign up to receive the Politicsweb headlines in your email inbox in the morning