Those calling on Zuma to follow his conscience should find theirs first

One of the best things I recently heard come out of South African politics is the word “conscience”. Even more interesting is that the word was used in the same sentence as “ANC” and “President Jacob Zuma”.

Responding to calls that Zuma should resign following former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela’s report on state capture, which details Zuma’s seemingly questionable relationship with the Gupta family, ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe said he can only hope that Zuma listens to his conscience and makes a decision on that basis.

The ANC in Gauteng also stated recently that Zuma should do the “honourable” thing and resign. This call came after the Constitutional Court found that Zuma had failed to protect the Constitution as a result of the manner in which he handled the Nkandla matter. 

Honour and conscience are indeed among the highest virtues in a society. Conscience requires that a person look into themselves and judge their own conduct as to whether it represents the best that can come out of humanity.

If Donald Trump was a man of honour, he would have looked into himself and asked himself if his past conduct towards women, for example, is the type of conduct that the president of any nation should be associated with. From this introspection, Trump would have then concluded that it is better for humanity if he withdrew his candidacy for US president.

In this example Trump’s withdrawal would have been a way to show that no matter how much political support a person receives from the general public, it does not qualify them to be the president of the US because they lack integrity.

When Mantashe appealed to Zuma’s integrity, he was saying to the president that it does not matter how much support he still enjoys in the ANC, he doesn’t have the integrity to continue to serve as the leader of the great nation of South Africa. ANC MP Mathole Motshekga jumped on the same bandwagon and stated that Zuma should do the right thing and leave office because he no longer represents the value system that South African society as a whole identifies with. The ANC caucus leader in Parliament, Jackson Mthembu, has also weighed in, maintaining that Zuma is no longer fit to remain in office.

The call for Zuma to leave office is indeed a good move, but it is interesting when that call comes from his former allies within the ANC. The people who are calling for Zuma’s departure were once his staunch allies. Those are the people who shielded Zuma from having to account in Parliament regarding the Nkandla matter. It was not an honourable thing for Zuma not to account to Parliament on this issue. Even more dishonourable was the decision by some to join in to protect him.

Appealing for honour and conscience should be consistent. Honour and conscience cannot only be called upon when it is politically convenient. That would be expediency. 

While I think Zuma should indeed do the honourable thing and resign, I do not think the likes of Motshekga and Mthembu are the right people to raise this matter. Further, I fully understand why Zuma simply ignores their call. If I were in his position, I would do the same and look the other way. The reality of the matter is that Zuma is fully aware that the relationship he had with his former allies was never based on honour and conscience; it was simply about political survival and convenience.

It is therefore odd for people who came together on the basis of nothing more than the quest to gain political power and its benefits to then appeal to one another’s sense of honour as a way of defining their relationship going forward.

Zuma would be rightfully surprised when his comrades suddenly start introducing strange concepts such as honour as one of the defining principles of the relationship he has had with those people. Actually, when people with no history of adhering to conscience and honour begin to raise questions relating to honour, one then reaches for their dictionary to make sure that the word honour still has the same meaning.

When dishonourable people appeal to honour, the principle loses its meaning altogether. It is therefore much better for Zuma’s former allies to simply state that they are sorry for having propped him up and for having entered into a political alliance that was not based on conscience.

That would require them to look into themselves and salvage whatever is remaining of their conscience and apologise for having brought Zuma to power and having shielded him from accounting on his incessant misdemeanours; before they start asking Zuma to look into his non-existent conscience. Before they do this, I’m just going to look the other way and listen to the birds singing!

Ralph Mathekga is a political analyst and author of When Zuma Goes.