Who to trust? And what about morale and the South African Police Service (SAPS) chain of command? The country is alarmed.
After KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s explosive allegations about senior police officers and politicians doing the bidding of criminal cartels, police minister Senzo Mchunu and national deputy commissioner Lt-Gen Shadrack Sibiya have been put on leave. It has been rumoured that other senior police officers, especially in Gauteng, are next.
With such severe disruption at the highest levels, political and professional, it is hard to believe that the collective mind of the SAPS leadership can possibly be on the job of fighting crime.
And even the administrative process is worrying. As Ian Cameron, chair of parliament’s portfolio committee on police, has noted, placing someone on leave of absence instead of suspending them for a disciplinary transgression, or as a precautionary measure, “is highly irregular and highlights the growing crisis of executive oversight at the top of the SAPS. This distinction is not a technicality, it is fundamental.” Being put on leave, says Cameron, carries no disciplinary implications and is not defined anywhere in the SAPS regulations.
It is hard to tell at this point who the good guys in the police are. But the general lack of grip and co-ordination, in security matters alone suggests a cabinet at odds with itself and operating in silos, and a president who is mostly disengaged.
The South African National Defence Force is underfunded and frequently hung out to dry. In February this year, Surgeon-General Lt-Gen Ntshavheni Maphaha laid into politicians over the country’s borders. “We are not protected. Our borders are porous and they are porous because you, the politicians, have decided you want a Mickey Mouse defence force.”
Last year, 95 Libyans were found receiving military training at a camp in Mpumalanga. The case against them was thrown out of court and they were apparently meant to be deported, but it is unclear whether this has happened.
Meanwhile, in parliament this week, state security minister Khumbudzo Ntshavheni alluded to the possibility of a coup in South Africa. “There is a potential risk of a coup d’état. We have identified it and put measures [in place] to mitigate against it.” What can this mean?
Ramaphosa’s misconception about what leadership is will tarnish his legacy
In the end, it all comes back to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s leadership — or lack thereof. He often appears disengaged. He takes a long time to react to crises, let alone the natural shocks that a political life routinely delivers. When he invites the nation to a “family meeting” on TV, he is always late — both disrespectful and indicative of an alarming lack of focus and planning in the presidency.
Ramaphosa likes to claim that he is not a dictator, that his leadership style is consensus-driven and democratic. His backers say he is careful in taking decisions, so as not to divide his party or lose its support — lest he suffer the same fate as his predecessors, Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma, both “recalled” by the ANC before the end of their second term.
Yet the presidency retains enormous power, and a “lame duck” has the advantage of not needing to seek re-election.
Ramaphosa’s misconception about what leadership is will tarnish his legacy, to a point where he will be remembered as the South African leader with the longest involvement and the most promise who accomplished the least.
He is quickly becoming the best president we never had.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.