The writing is on the wall for Jacob Zuma, South Africa’s embattled president, but will he heed it? Rumblings of discontent over alleged high-level corruption, influence-peddling and economic mismanagement have been growing in vehemence and volume all year. They have now reached fever pitch amid impassioned calls for Zuma’s immediate resignation.
The intensifying furore follows Wednesday’s publication of a report by a respected independent watchdog demanding an urgent judicial inquiry into possible graft involving the president and his son. Zuma’s position looks precarious. The president’s term, his second, runs until 2019. As matters stand, few would bet on him going the full distance.
Zuma has been beset by intrigue and scandal since first taking office. Unbending support from the higher echelons of the ruling party, the African National Congress, has mostly protected him. But the ANC’s political firewall, like its grip on power, is weakening, as shown by unprecedented reverses in August’s municipal elections.
His latest humiliating setback came when he was forced to drop his court bid to block publication of the official report, by Thuli Madonsela, formerly South Africa’s most senior anti-corruption watchdog, into alleged influence-peddling.
The report is not conclusive. But it expresses “serious concerns” about claims that Zuma conducted an improper relationship with the powerful Gupta business family and that government policy and cabinet appointments were influenced as a result. It calls for a judge-led inquiry.
Both Zuma and the Guptas deny the allegations.
Earlier this year Zuma was also in hot water over the Nkandla scandal. He was eventually forced to apologise after it emerged that the cost of taxpayer-funded luxury improvements to his rural residence had risen nearly tenfold. In 2014, Madonsela accused him of misuse of public money and unethical conduct.
Her report, entitled Secure in Comfort, noted the estimated $23m (£19m) cost was eight times what was spent on securing two private homes for the former president Nelson Mandela, and more than 1,000 times what was spent on South Africa’s last apartheid-era president, FW de Klerk. Zuma was obliged to repay $500,000.
Zuma came under additional fire this week over an attempt by the state prosecutor, Shaun Abrahams, to bring fraud charges against the finance minister, Pravin Gordhan. The charges were suddenly dropped on Monday in the face of fierce opposition. Critics suggested Zuma and his allies were attempting to discredit a minister who was blocking their access to lucrative government contracts and treasury funds. Zuma has denied any conflict with Gordhan.
Public criticism of Zuma now reaches beyond his personal actions. Opponents are claiming South Africa’s sometimes tenuous post-apartheid grip on democracy is under threat and that the economy, and the common people’s welfare, are at risk, exemplified by high youth unemployment.
The Gupta affair has rattled markets in Africa’s most industrialised economy, which is stagnating and faces possible ratings downgrades. Zuma and the ANC are meanwhile under attack from all sides, including the opposition Democratic Alliance, church leaders, party rebels, the media and online petitioners.
The Nelson Mandela Foundation charity warned on Tuesday that the “wheels [are] coming off” South Africa, while business groups and CEOs have called for new political leadership.
At a rally in Pretoria on Wednesday, speakers from the Save South Africa coalition accused the ANC government of presiding over rampant corruption and called on Zuma to quit.
Cheryl Carolus, a former ANC luminary and respected anti-apartheid activist, said the country was in crisis and younger generations were being betrayed. “We have reached a point where we feel that the people of this country, including us in the ANC, have to take a stand and draw a line in the sand,” she said.
“We are appalled that … a small handful of people have decided that they would capture the state, its institutions and resources for their own benefit.”
The chief rabbi, Warren Goldstein, of the national religious leaders’ council, said South Africa was at a crossroads. “There is a titanic struggle taking place,” he said. “Who is really sovereign in this country? Is the government elected by the people, for the people, exercising sovereignty on behalf of the people, or does the very sovereignty of this country belong to a few corrupt families and those who benefit from them?”
Yet the opposition to Zuma is by no means united. Influential figures within the ANC are determined that he does not follow the former president Thabo Mbeki into involuntary early retirement, if only in order to safeguard their own interests. Others may wish to jettison him for the same reasons. There are also ideological divisions.
Julius Malema, the former ANC youth wing firebrand who leads the Economic Freedom Fighters, condemned the Save South Africa movement as representatives of “white monopoly capital”. He added: “They must not think we are friends. We will never be friends.”
If he is to survive, Zuma must hope his many critics dislike each other more than they dislike him.
