A threat to democracy

I begin with an apology for yet another post about South African politics, but the events of yesterday cannot go unremarked upon.  It amazes me that they were not reported on any UK network news.  Democracy was hard fought for in this country, and yesterday it faced grave threats.

Last night, President Zuma was to give the annual State of the Nation Address (SONA) to a joint sitting of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces at the parliament in Cape Town.  I wrote yesterday that it would be an interesting political event given the current situation in the country, but I could not have expected the chaos which ensued.

Before the sitting even began, protests began in the media gallery as they discovered that their mobile signals were being jammed by a clocking device, preventing them from live reporting the events.  No decision had ever been taken by parliament to do this, and indeed such devices are illegal for use except by state security departments.  South Africa's constitution expressly provides freedom of information communication in situations such as this.

As soon as the speaker opened the session, MP after MP from the opposition parties raised points of order demanding that the signal be unblocked.  The speaker ordered the Secretary to the Parliament to investigate and eventually the signal blocker was turned off and business could proceed.

Or not, as the case turned out.  President Zuma had barely spoken a few words when it became clear that his microphone was not working, a result of the Parliament staff withdrawing their labour.  This (and the water supply for thirsty MPs) fixed, at last Zuma could deliver the SONA.

Again, maybe not.  Shortly after starting, the President was interrupted the Whip of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) who raised a question of privilege with the Speaker asking when the President was going to pay back money spent on his private residence in KwaZulu Natal that the Protector said he had unduly benefited from.  The Speaker stated that this session was not for questions, and that there would be ample opportunity to question the President at next week's sitting.

Before she had even completed, another EFF member raised the same point, followed by another, at which point the Speaker lost her temper and ordered the member to leave the chamber.  This provoked a number of EFF members to raise points of order asking under which rule the Speaker was ejecting their colleagues, and these members were too asked to leave.  When they refused, the Speaker sent in security forces to remove them.

During this time, the parliamentary TV feed focused on the speaker, but footage was shot by mobile phone from the press gallery which shows plain-clothed, armed security forces violently dragging the entire EFF party from the parliament.  Mercedes Besent, a journalist from SABC who got caught up in the scuffle reported seeing security officials "kicking, beating and dragging" EFF MPs out of the building.  One of the MPs ended up in hospital.

The Leader and Chief Whip of the official opposition party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), then continually asked the speaker whether these security men were parliamentary officials or police.  This was a key issue, DA Leader Maimane said, as one reports to the Speaker while the other reports to the executive, and this would be "unconstitutional".  When the Speaker and Chairwoman refused to say whether they were police or not, the DA walked out of the chamber, followed by the other opposition parties COPE and the UDM.

So, an hour later than planned, and speaking only to his own party, President Zuma was able to deliver his SONA, beginning - without a hint of irony - by commemorating 60 years since the adoption of the Freedom Charter and 25 years sice the release of Mandela.

Understandably, huge controversy has surrounded the events.  Clearly, the EFF were wrong to try and disrupt the business of parliament and the speaker had to take some action to ensure the SONA could go ahead, but was she right to eject members raising points of order without first hearing their point?  Then comes the question of the security forces.  If they were police or private forces entering parliament to remove an entire opposition party, this constitutes a breach of the separation of powers required for a transparent democracy.  Note also that the entire EFF were removed though only a handful of individuals had been asked to leave by the speaker.  With the remaining opposition parties walking out, what kind of scrutiny does it offer to the South African people if only the governing party is present for such an important occasion?  And what about the signal blocker?  On whose authority was that installed and what information were they trying to contain?

Ultimately, media and political attention has focused on these issues rather than the content of the SONA.  With half of South African young people unemployed, the value of the rand sliding, protests against foreign shopkeepers in Soweto continuing, the University of KwaZulu Natal closed due to protests and enforced power cuts due to ramp up tomorrow, I would suggest that the people of South Africa deserve a democracy which holds the executive to account and that all parties and parliamentary authorities need to work together to achieve this.

Former President Thabo Mbeki said of the events, "We are elected by people who want to find solutions; all political parties need to discuss this.  You can't tell a person that you can't ask that question.  Don't use administrative problems to solve political problems.  You've got to confront the political elements and have a political engagement."

The blocking of communications and the use of armed forces to violently remove an entire opposition party cannot be allowed in a free, democratic society.  This, combined with an opposition unable to hold the executive to account, constitutes a real threat to democracy.