Play the Facts, Not the Man [Mail and Guardian, 2005-10-21]

Publication	Mail and Guardian
Date	2005-10-21
Reporter	Letters

I was astounded by the anti--democratic stand taken against Jacob Zuma in your editorial “Be afraid, be very afraid” (October 14).

Your assertion that Zuma’s actions offer a clear snapshot of what his presidency would be like is totally misplaced. He is on the back foot in a case that the National Prosecuting Authority strangely wants to postpone after almost five years of investigations. His behaviour should be judged in a context of one who is defending himself against accusations, and not that of the presidency.

You refer to Zuma as a populist prepared to pander to the basest instincts of ordinary people. What exactly is populism? Without it and the efforts of the ordinary people, the African National Congress would not have been unbanned and Nelson Mandela would still be in jail. Without it, the ANC government would not be in power.

It is not the intellectuals at the Mail & Guardian who put the ANC and Thabo Mbeki into power, but the ordinary people. Didn’t President Mbeki descend from his ivory tower to pander to the “basest instincts of ordinary people” to get himself re-elected for a second term? Didn’t the ANC use populism to win elections by promising “a better life for all”? “Populism” is a loose term whose meaning is unclear and which can be abused to advance certain arguments. If you have a case against Zuma, argue it factually without resorting to wanton generalisations.

You complain that Zuma has never given his version of the R500 000 bribe message, although he has only to call a press conference to provide it. Perhaps -- but what if doing so would compromise his impending case? What if his attorneys advised him against doing this?

And why only Zuma? Why are you not using your investigative journalistic skills to follow up the other two encrypted faxes of a similar nature that “implicate” another high--ranking politician? I’m referring to the ones raised by the Democratic Alliance in Parliament.

You also hint that Zuma needs to be prevented from becoming a presi-dent. I am disappointed that the M&G, like whites under apartheid, seems to be afraid of democracy. The decision on who becomes president lies with the electorate. If voters catapult Zuma to the presidency, everyone who respects democracy -- including the M&G -- should bow to the wishes of the people. And since when have you been in the business of canvassing support for or against potential presidential candidates?

Another thing -- Zuma has every right to express his feelings in an open forum. A dangerous pattern is emerging in South Africa whereby certain pronouncements are regarded as taboo and should not be aired.

The M&G has every right to disagree with Zuma, but should do so by playing the facts and not the man. Comments like “If installed as president, it would be reasonable to conclude that Zuma would continue operating in the same way” are premature, reckless, devoid of fact and speculative.

This case is still far too much in its infancy to conclude what a Zuma presidency would be like. We do not even know what revelations -- either against or in favour of Zuma -- will come out of the trial.

Until then it would be prudent for the M&G to keep its daggers in the closet, and in the process retain the credibility it has painstakingly established over the years.

Your summary of the appalling situation Zuma is creating was spot on. Most sane people would likewise be appalled at the prospect of a Zuma presidency, for the reasons you list.

He appears to be milking his supporters to the very limit, while showing no loyalty to his country.

The M&G is one of the few newspapers -- if not the only one -- to comment on the alarming potential of the scenes at Zuma’s court appearance in Durban, and the ominous appearance of self-appointed “bodyguards”.

The appearance of similar, if not the same, sinister individuals at Brett Kebble’s funeral was equally disturbing. One was reminded of early events in the rise of Hitler.

It is obvious that the next president of South Africa will be chosen by ANC members. Those who are “afraid, very afraid” that the next president is not to their liking have a simple remedy.

The ANC is a vibrant institution governed by powerful democratic forces that even the president cannot ignore. If even half of those quivering in their boots would join the ANC and vote on all issues dealing with the succession, their nemesis would be dead in the water -- Zuma rather than later.

It has been widely claimed that Zuma has breached a truce between himself and Mbeki. It is breathtaking that the very elements who expelled him and destroyed his chance of becoming the next president want him to abide by an absurd “truce” in which he is expected to maintain the silence of the sacrificial lamb -- when his dignity and legitimate place in the history of the struggle is at stake.

The idea is also being flighted that Zuma may receive a presidential pardon if he is willing to drop out of the presidential race! The presidential succession was the reason for his expulsion in the first instance. It is outrageous that this very fact is now being proposed for a plea bargain. To accept it would be to surrender to a devious ploy.