ANC NEC and support for Zuma: Can democratic centralism go wrong?
As a unitary political formation, the ANC relies on democratic centralism as one of the principles guiding its political and ideological operations. This principle is based on at least three pillars, namely;
i) Decisions of the majority prevail;
ii) Decisions of higher structures bind lowers structures; and
iii) Responsibility of leaders and cadres.
This principle, if applied in tandem with other principles like, inter alia, consultation, collective leadership, criticism and self-criticism, can make an organization a powerful leader of society and the principal nucleus in the waging of the National Democratic Revolution.
Democratic centralism as a stand-alone item in the revolution
In its wisdom, the ANC never conceptualized the idea of democratic centralism as if it were to exist outside, or in exclusion to, other important principles. The ANC knew that where decisions of the higher structures bind lower structures, in the absence of consultation, the result will be a top-down political movement, and that the lower structures were to become pawns, rather than active agents, in the waging of a revolution.
American political activist and union organizer, Albert Wesibord (1900 - 1977), wrote of what he called the “fraudulent practice of democratic centralism”. He refers to Stalin’s USSR, where the party (mis) used the principle of democratic centralism to purge and even kill those who disagreed with the leadership.
It is because of this important era of history that ANC declared that democratic centralism shall never be used in isolation of other principles, or for its own sake. In its paper, prepared for its 50th Conference held in Mafikeng in 1997, the ANC wrote; “Events of the past few years have sparked debates about the democratic culture of the ANC. Questions are raised as to whether we have become a movement which is top-down, elitist and lacking a climate for free, open and critical debate”…
The Paper continued; “These concerns are often raised where the NEC intervenes in problems of leadership (such as the Free State, KwaZulu/Natal, the Northern Province and ANCWL Conferences), in issues of policy (such as the macro-economic strategy-GEAR), or of tactics such as the approach of the NWC on the various border disputes.
In the context of poor, or lack of, consultation, the decisions of the higher structure or of the party may bind the members in society, but may lead to those who disagree with the decisions feeling marginalized, or isolated. In such a political instance, the capacity of a party to conduct its political and ideological work may be weakened.
Of wearing ANC regalia and the respect of the judicial system
At its NEC meeting last month, the NEC resolved that members of the ANC may attend the court appearance of its ex-officio member, Comrade Jacob Zuma, in their individual capacities, “but not wearing ANC T-shirts or regalia”. This unprecedented decision raises more questions than answers. In fact, this decision is confusing.
Firstly, the ANC has never made a decision regarding wearing of ANC regalia in any environment. ANC T-shirts and regalia have been seen in places of worship, in shebeens and taverns, in court by those accused for different crimes, and elsewhere. The ANC, either through a Conference or the NEC, has never pronounced on this, probably because the T-shirt of the ANC acts as a walking advert of the movement.
Not so long ago, the members of the ANC wore ANC regalia whilst they attacked women in front of Luthuli House, presumably in defence of the ANC. At least one of the assailants was arrested, still wearing ANC regalia. The ANC never pronounced itself on this matter.
Secondly, the decision that ANC members must not wear ANC regalia to the court appearance of Comrade Zuma seeks to undermine the universal principle of justice; that one is presumed innocent until found otherwise in a court of law. This decision seeks to make a subtle statement that the ANC NEC recognizes Zuma as guilty, even before he is found so by the court of law. This decision is therefore highly problematic.
Lastly, the decision has far reaching consequences for future instances. What will happen when members of the ANC Women’s League, for example, wish to support an alleged victim of rape at court? I use the word ‘alleged’ because only the court of law can prove if a person has been raped or not, at least in the context of the South African judicial system. Does the NEC mean that those members of the Women’s League must support, but not wear ANC regalia?
If the opposite is true, are we making a distinction when members support a witness, alleged victim or an alleged perpetrator? If so, are we not being unfair? Would we prefer if members of the ANC undermine the decisions of the court, or when they march peacefully in support of anyone who makes an appearance, in their individual capacities, and wearing whatever they prefer? What about those members who use the ANC logo for factional campaigns?
Conclusion
The noble principle of democratic centralism must be used to advance the policy, political and ideological stances of the organization towards its attainment of the National Democratic Society. The NEC, as the highest decision-making structure between Conferences, has a responsibility to ensure that decisions resonate with the views of the majority.
The NEC, methinks, have erred in arriving at this particular decision. This represents a case where democratic centralism has gone wrong, according to my analysis. To wear, or not to wear, an ANC T-shirt must be an individual decision of the member of the ANC in question. Those appearing in courts, for whatever reasons, have a right to be supported by any section of the population, wearing whatever they choose to wear.
It is only when a court of law has found a member of society guilty that we can regard an individual as guilty. The nation’s criminal justice system seeks to attain fairness at all costs. It is for this reason that even a suspected child rapist is entitled to legal representation. The ANC, as a custodian of the principle of fair justice, must be in the forefront of its defence, rather than of its undermining, consciously and unconsciously.
Tiisetso ‘Afrika’ Makhele is an African Socialist and an ANC member in Mangaung, Free State. He writes in his personal capacity
