‘The new ‘verligte' and ‘verkrampte' in South Africa'

Our democratic republic is now 14 years old. At birth, it was a wonder of the world. Many called it a miracle. They felt that something supernatural had happened to transform a country characterised by oppression, racial conflict and violence into one of peaceful democracy. But there was no miracle. Instead, and much more to our credit, there was a victory of commonsense and decency. This did not emerge from nowhere. It represented a triumph of ideas, once suppressed and marginalised, whose time had eventually come.

Opponents, often vehement opponents, sat down together and through sensible deliberation and principled negotiation produced something that was greater than any of them, an excellent Constitution - the bedrock of our democracy, the guarantor of our liberties.

14 years later, it troubles me profoundly to say that our young constitutional democracy is under threat. Are these the growing pains of adolescence, from which we will emerge stronger and more resilient? Or will they prove terminal to the great project which bore such hope in its infancy?

The threat we face comes from within, and is directed towards the heart of our democracy, the Constitution itself. An ambitious and influential group within the ruling party is preparing for power by any means necessary and it is prepared to undermine the spirit and letter of our Constitution to do so. They believe their triumph to be more important than the welfare of South Africa. This is a time of peril, and we can only appreciate the danger if we look hard at what it is that sustains our society and what it is that preserves our liberties.

The miracle moment of our transition was not represented by the long queues when we voted together to end apartheid. It was when the aeroplanes of our air force flew above the Union Buildings and dipped their wings to salute the newly inaugurated President of South Africa, Nelson Mandela. Those pilots, representing the armed force of the state, almost certainly from backgrounds quite different from those of the new ruling party, were not only paying homage to President Mandela but also to democracy and the highest ideals of our interim Constitution. They were acknowledging the legitimacy of changing governments through the ballot box, the separation of party and state, the limitations on their own power. Their allegiance to the Constitution overrode their loyalty to any party. 

The question I ask myself is this: did we in South Africa make the transition to constitutionalism too quickly to understand its significance? Will it therefore decline as quickly as it evolved? 

The signs are not encouraging.

Jacob Zuma, as all who have met him will agree, is a charming man. He is certainly more affable than his predecessor as head of the ANC. He has the common touch and a natural personal humility. However, his charm belies a fundamental disdain for the Constitution. He has said openly that the ANC is more important than the Constitution and that "once you begin to feel you are above the ANC, you are in trouble".

Zuma has repeated more than once that "the ANC will rule South Africa until Jesus comes back." He is on record saying that a country should not have opposition parties simply because there has to be opposition parties. Zuma believes in the ‘higher law of the party' - the most dangerous of all political delusions and a fig leaf for the higher law of the interests of party leaders.

If Zuma is found guilty of corruption and given a sentence of more than 12 months it will prevent his becoming the next president. His supporters are determined to remove this obstacle, by whatever means it takes, because for them the ends justify the means.

Recent comments by Julius Malema and Zwelinzima Vavi that they would kill for Zuma are menacing sounds. So too is Gwede Manatashe's talk of ‘counter-revolutionaries.' Their strategy is to smear and diminish the Constitutional Court because it threatens to uphold the rule of the law in the Jacob Zuma trial and so is an impediment to his presidency.

The fact of the matter is that almost every liberation movement has gone the same way after attaining power. The simple reason is this: Liberation struggles are about attaining power. Constitutional democracy is about limiting power. Very few activists who have engaged in liberation struggles understand this distinction and they therefore cannot make the transition to the next stage of development. 

They equate their own power with the revolution. Anyone who limits their power is therefore counter-revolutionary. Of course, the opposite is in fact true. As soon as most struggle heroes attain power, they tend to betray the values that motivated their liberation struggle in the first place, because they cannot come to terms with limiting their own power - a precondition for constitutionalism.

In an adolescent democracy, moreover, most voters help to sustain their leaders' delusions, wittingly or not. It often takes decades for people to realise they have been hoodwinked by the people they trusted, and to whom they gave more and more power. By then it is often too late. In a democracy, voters get the government they deserve, and must accept responsibility. Constitutional limits on power abuse are easy to lose but difficult to reclaim. 

I have painted a gloomy picture so far. I do believe there are serious threats to our constitutional rule. But I am not gloomy. In some sense I have never felt more excited about our prospects for dramatically improving our political landscape, and so improving our economy and the lives of all our people. In the very schisms and tumults of our politics, there is great hope. Let me explain.

Politics in South Africa is already, largely unseen, going through a fundamental re-alignment and this cuts right through the middle of the ANC. Politics is re-defining itself around the Constitution. The fundamental divide in the ANC is over whether you support the Constitution (even if you do not believe it is perfect) or whether you are prepared to push it aside if it obstructs your path to power and personal advantage. Professor Kader Asmal of the ANC has recently published a declaration in defence of Constitution and invited South Africans to sign it. I have done so. So have Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Ronnie Kasrils, Mosiuoa Lekota and Ben Turok.

There are men and women in the ANC who believe fundamentally in the supremacy of the Constitution and would concur, I have no doubt, with many of the points I have raised tonight. In 1996, after Jacob Zuma had asserted that the ANC was superior to the Constitution, the most telling rebuttal came from within the ANC, from Mosiuoa Lekota. He said:

"I think in the coming period we are going to have to answer to that because if that statement is going to be the guiding light for the ANC then I think we are completely on the wrong route. I cannot see that South Africa can be different from so many of the African countries which have got excellent documents on paper but when it comes to practice it's completely something different. I think if in the end that is really what we have fought for or what we are expected to have fought for and so on, then freedom will never really dawn on our side." 

It is no coincidence that Lekota was howled down by the mob as he tried to exercise his function of chairing the ANC's Polokwane conference. It is not enough to have a good Constitution. It must be enforced and protected. It needs constant vigilance to guard and maintain the Constitution and make sure it always works as it was intended to work. And it is a work in progress

The National Party ruled South Africa for 46 years. At times, it seemed monolithic and invincible, destined to continue its oppressive rule into perpetuity. Towards the end, it tried to pretend it was a united party but in fact it was deeply divided between the "Verligtes" who wanted to reform apartheid and possibly even to end apartheid, and the "Verkramptes" who wanted to continue its cruel farce. "Broedertwis" divided their ranks. 

The ANC, after only 14 years, is showing the same schism. It is also divided between its Verligtes, who support constitutional rule, and its Verkramptes, who want to subordinate the Constitution to the pursuit of power. Broedertwis has been replaced with Comrade-twis. And I know there are many Constitutionalists in the ANC who have more in common with the DA than they do with the anti-constitutionalists in their own party. 

Some National Party supporters used to believe they were born into their party and that it would be a grave disloyalty to their people to vote for anyone else. This ended after about 30 years. There are some ANC voters who feel the same way. I believe this will end much sooner.

The old political formations bequeathed by apartheid are obsolete. We have to bring party formations in line with the new reality, the real political divisions of our time. The biggest barrier to this process is the democrats in the ANC who believe their party is redeemable. It is not. 

Among the turbulence and clamour in the ANC now, among the purging of provincial premiers and the thinly veiled menaces to the judiciary and the growling of unscrupulous men hungry for power, there is unprecedented opportunity to re-shape the politics of South Africa for the better. There is a chance to break up the present rather sterile party alignments and replace them with parties that represent issues and ideas rather than races or traditions. 

The most important issue, the most important idea is whether or not you support freedom, the rule of the law and the Constitution. Those who believe this are drawn from all races. They draw encouragement from our judges of the Constitutional Court who show no sign of backing down before threats and sneers and immoral suasion. They are buoyed by our free press, and our vigorous civil society, our excellent institutions of justice and democracy, and the mighty ranks of our people who support law and liberty. 

Despite the turbulence and turmoil of adolescence I believe that we will survive this stage, and that our Constitution will come of age. It depends on us. We are the guardians of the Constitution to which we gave birth. From that moment on it was our duty to nurture and defend it. We will not fail.

Thank you.

This is an extract from a lecture by Helen Zille, leader of the Democratic Alliance, to the University of Witwatersrand Law School, Johannesburg, July 22 2008