Healthy dollop of scepticism over whether Zuma will leave

SUZANNE BELLING

As part of her remedial actions, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela had asked Zuma nearly two years ago to pay for the costs of the non-security upgrades.

DA MP Michael Bagraim said the judiciary has proved to be completely independent. 

“This judgment from the highest court in the land speaks volumes for the independence of the judiciary and indeed the legal profession.  It is a common refrain that it is very difficult to ‘speak truth to power’ but in this instance our system has done us proud.” He describes the judgment as both concise and clear, leaving nothing to interpretation. 

“It is important to understand that there is no appeal and no going back. The only way for a system to redeem itself after a death blow of this nature is for resignations or impeachment.

“Although one tends to focus on President Zuma, it should be noted that he was strongly aided and abetted by every single member of the ANC caucus. The Hansard records are loud and clear; the support for President Zuma’s actions were strongly voiced by the ANC leadership and certainly underlined by the vote. 

“Our Constitutional Court has condemned Parliament for this support and has stated openly that Parliament itself has breached the Constitution. “This state of affairs has evidenced a constitutional crisis of enormous proportions.  For our government to continue with ‘business as usual’ would show a disdain for not only the Constitution but also morality.  Every thinking citizen of this country needs to express their shock not only through the civil voices open to them but through the ballot box,” Bagraim said.

Capetonian Jen Karabus, who was following the newspaper reports regularly and with great interest, said she would be delighted to see any sign of remorse on Zuma’s “smiling face”.

“I wonder how he will wiggle out of this one – but he will get out of it by hook or by crook.”

Karabus said she was pleased with the Constitutional Court findings and that all 11 justices concurred with the judgment after the evidence was presented.

Businessman, radio presenter and blogger Howard Feldman described the Concourt judgment as “a victory for all South Africans, no matter which political party you associate with.

“It gives us hope at a time where hope is what we need. What matters now is how the ANC chooses to deal with the ruling because the buck has finally stopped with the Constitutional Court.”

Angela Lurie, of Waverley, thought the Constitutional Court decision was “quite right”.

“I applaud it. It gives me confidence back. It makes me proud to be a South African, but I think it’s going to be water off a duck’s back. If he doesn’t pay, somebody will pay for him.”

Independently, using the same terminology as Jen Karabus, she said: “He’s going to wiggle out of it. The ANC is going to find some way for him to do so. He has wiggled out of everything he has ever been accused of.

“There is no doubt about it, he will remain president, because they are a law unto themselves. I don’t think the ruling will make much of a difference, because they have a majority in Parliament.”

She said they (the ANC) feel they had given South Africans their freedom and therefore they must have our vote.

Darren Bergman, DA MP, described the ruling on Nkandla as “a great victory for the most important foundation of our new democracy and the Constitution.

“It shows that no one is above the law and that no matter how far the executive may stray from the Constitution, while there is a separate power within the judiciary, we still have hope.”

He said he was not certain whether President Zuma would be recalled, in terms of what the ruling might mean for the ANC and the people who have put their full support behind the action of the President.

“This could be a painful mistake for the ANC. However, recalling the President now might seem just as painful for those invested in the patronage system.

“The next few weeks will be very telling. We need to watch how the ANC, executive and national assembly treat the judgment and what actions come from the ruling. As a proud South-African and a person who wants to see South-Africa rise, I am hoping that the President and the ministers who protected his actions, will do the honourable thing and resign.”

Johannesburger Jenny Baard is very impressed that Public Protector Thuli Madonsela has been vindicated. “She should be the next president of South Africa. I think it’s incredible that the judges stood up for the country.”

Baard said the problem was what she originally took as an April Fool’s statement – President Zuma’s public “apology” – was in fact serious.

“It looks as if he is going to get away unscathed again,” she said, “which is a tragedy for this beautiful country.”

Glenhazel mother Ashleigh Elad said that in spite of the ruling, she did not feel positive although she used to be a “proud South African Jew”.

She added: “I don’t see many intellectuals in the ANC and I am feeling increasingly despondent. If Zuma goes, who will follow?

“Despite Zuma, we have to ask ourselves whether there is a future, especially for our children, in South Africa. The infrastructure of the country is falling apart – look at the rubbish piling up in the streets of Johannesburg.

“Maybe we are going through life with blinkers. Everything is uncertain. The DA will get my vote, but I don’t know if it will make a difference.”