After reading Barney Mthombothi's column in The Mercury on August 19, I felt obliged to respond.

I have great respect for Mthombothi and I am in no way questioning his journalistic bona fides.

Firstly, Mthombothi refers to the fact that Zuma was not President Mbeki's first choice of deputy president but that his appointment was somewhat fortuitous. He states that "when Buthelezi refused the invitation to serve as Mbeki's deputy, the job fell to Zuma". This leaves an impression that Mbeki was offering the deputy presidency to Buthelezi because he did not want Zuma as his deputy.

Would Mthombothi dispute the fact that the ANC takes decisions as a collective and that the decision to offer Buthelezi the deputy president position was a decision of the ANC as a collective and not that of Mbeki as an individual?

As part of the collective, Zuma would also have been part of the decision. Would Mthombothi also dispute that the ANC was making this offer to Buthelezi in line with the principal agreement of co-operation between the IFP and the ANC, which was endorsed by the ANC and the IFP long before the elections of 1999? When Buthelezi refused the position, would Mthombothi dispute the fact that the ANC, as a collective, then decided that the deputy president of the ANC - Zuma - who had been unanimously elected to such a position, should rightfully assume the position of deputy president of the country? This job would therefore not have just accidentally fallen to Zuma, as suggested by Mthombothi.  

Mthombothi also questions whether Zuma is ready to take over should something happen to Mbeki. He concludes that the answer is "no", but does not state his reasons for this conclusion.

Is Mthombothi suggesting that Zuma has been damaged by his trial in the media?

I find it very disturbing for such a senior person in the media fraternity to be the judge of who the deputy president must and must not associate with. Again, Mthombothi just makes an assertion that "Mr Schabir Shaik does not seem like somebody that a man who is a heartbeat away from the presidency should associate with". Like the deputy president, Shaik has not been convicted of any offence in the matter that gave rise to the media trial of the deputy president.

Perhaps Mthombothi has a reason for writing about Shaik with no substantiation. I would like to ask Mthombothi: Should Zuma end up being cleared of any wrongdoing, will you continue to refer to him as damaged goods?

Will you continue to insist that "he spare the country from embarrassment and fall on his sword?"

Should Schabir Shaik end up being cleared of any wrongdoing, will you withdraw your slanderous attack on him and apologise?

Willies Mchunu ANC MP Chairman of the SA Communist Party in KZN.

With acknowledgement to Willies Mchunu and The Mercury.