If the opposition and civil society cannot translate the Concourt’s ruling into something tangible, the words will mean nothing, writes Andiswa Makanda.

In a not surprising move, the ANC MPs closed ranks around President Jacob Zuma by voting against the motion to impeach him, presenting a united façade in Parliament. To the naïve horror and disappointment of some, the list of those who voted against the impeachment included the likes of Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, his deputy Mcebisi Jonas, Tourism Minister Derek Hanekom, Science and Technology Minister Naledi Pandor and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, the politicians seen by many as morally astute, the few good ones remaining in the party.

The DA knew it would not be successful in its bid to remove the president, for the strategy was to expose the contempt and disregard the ANC had for the constitution, hence its chief whip John Steenhuisen called for a “division”, which would reveal those who voted for or against the motion to impeach the president. We now know the ANC, ANC MPs and the president don’t give a damn about the constitution nor the office of the public protector. Parliament swears the Constitutional Court did not make any adverse findings against it.

Deputy Justice Minister John Jeffrey told MPs that the Concourt did not find any “serious” violation of the constitution by the president, just a small violation compared to the atrocities committed by many, and therefore the Struggle credentials of the party warrants that we forgive the president, ANC chief whip Jackson Mthembu told Redi Tlhabi on Tlhabi’s Talk Radio 702 show. And the sad reality is there is no provision to remove the president outside a two-thirds majority voting system, requiring 267 of the 400 members. Even the Concourt cannot compel the National Assembly to fire the president. Interestingly, our constitution, the highest law in the land, that cannot be superseded by any government action or law, has inadvertently protected those in power.

Nelson Mandela’s era built our democracy and constitution, Thabo Mbeki’s era built the structures of our economy, and Zuma’s era saw us in a constitutional crisis. Coincidentally, our constitutional turmoil comes at the time we celebrate more than 20 years of our constitutional democracy. And we should take the time to engage in robust public debates about our constitution, its limits and parameters.

We need robust dialogues about the type of democracy we want, the electoral system needed support such a democracy. We need to ask ourselves does majoritarianism fulfil the ideals of a democracy.

Do we want a constituency electoral system, proportional system or a majority electoral system? With the EFF growing stronger, and the DA trailing behind the ANC, do we need to consider a consociational democracy, loosely referred to as power-sharing? After all, our constitution was birthed by an all-inclusive consultative process, overseen by the government of national unity. To what extent would such a system be regressive?

And while we hold our national breath, clinging to the hope that the upcoming elections will reveal a weakening ANC at the mercy of its own transgressions and legitimacy shortcomings, it would be foolish to expect a legitimate regime change overnight. Our democracy is only 22 years old, with the opposition competing with a party formed more than a 100 years ago, which took decades of fighting to remove the apartheid government.

Moreover, the opposition lacks a “collective national memory” the ANC claims it shares with the majority. It is the idea of a shared history that the ANC evokes to influence the perception of people. It is this national memory that the ANC will deploy as it fights for the seat of power. For national memory is the instrument of power that can be manipulated by those in power or seeking power. It is the key element in nationalist discourse designed to unite people against foes.

Attend the ANC rallies and you will hear it. The people will be reminded of the sacrifices made by the ANC’s forefathers and current leaders to liberate us from the clutches of the evil apartheid government. People will be reminded of the pain inflicted by Hendrik Verwoerd. They will be reminded of the services brought by the ANC government. The proverbial gogo Dlamini will be reminded on the door-to-door campaign that the house she lives in, the social grant to buy food and clothes, the clinic down the road are courtesy of the ANC-led government. They will be reminded that things could have been better if it were not for all the billions of rand wasted by the apartheid government to sustain apartheid and segregation.

At the ANC rallies, memories will be mobilised, narrations idealised. We will raise our fists high and say “Amandla”. We will speak of the ANC of Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Pixley Seme. Even the opposition plays on memory to fight the ANC.

While the opposition is holding on to constitutionalism, rule of law, armed with the Concourt ruling as its last bastion of hope to destroy the ANC, let us not forget the words of Amilcar Cabral who said: “Always remember that the people are not fighting for ideas, nor for what is in men’s minds. The people fight and accept the sacrifices demanded by the struggle in order to gain material advantages, to live better and in peace, to benefit from progress, and for the better future of their children. National liberation, the struggle against colonialism, the construction of peace, progress and independence are hollow words devoid of any significance, unless they can be translated into a real improvement of living conditions.”

The electorate, especially the marginalised and disenfranchised, will want to know from the opposition what it can do. They do not care about the intangibles.

Despite the chief justice’s beautifully articulated description of Parliament – “the embodiment of the centuries-old dreams and legitimate aspirations of all our people” – the electorate, and I am not talking of the urban electorate, the ANC is all it knows. They grew up with the movement affectionately associated with freedom and liberation, the ANC means something different, to different people.

If the opposition and civil society cannot translate the Concourt’s ruling against Zuma and the public protector’s findings on Nkandla into something meaningful and tangible to improve their living conditions, the words will mean nothing. And we must not forget that regime change was not brought about by what happened in Parliament, but by the material reality and the continued deterioration of the living conditions of the people on the ground.

For Frantz Fanon did warn us that: “Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalise, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”

Despite the Concourt ruling, and the public protector’s findings on Nkandla, it is fathomable the people will vote with their feet or vote the ANC back in power. Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu once said we will start praying for the defeat of the ANC, until then, may God save us all.

*Andiswa Makanda is an award-winning producer at 702 and 567. She writes in her personal capacity