The ANC’s parliamentary code of conduct is part of an internal power struggle, reports Chris Louw
BEHIND last week’s introduction of a code of conduct for ANC MPs and MECs lies a struggle for the heart of the governing party.
Elements in the three-cornered fight are President Nelson Mandela and his cabinet, ANC backbenchers eager to assert themselves and ANC secretary general Cyril Ramaphosa. Five months after the election, the ANC is still trying to sort out its hierarchy of power.
The introduction of the mandatory code of conduct, which MPs have to sign or forfeit their positions, is part of a bid by Ramaphosa to strengthen his position as an ANC leader outside cabinet. The code is a strategic move by Ramaphosa to win back the initiative from both his cabinet colleagues and backbenchers in the ANC caucus who were planning to assert themselves through the parliamentary standing committees.
Ramaphosa’s intervention is seen as a direct challenge to mostly leftwing dissidents in the ANC. He is insisting on a signed undertaking from all ANC MPs that they will not “attempt to make use of parliamentary structures to undermine organisational decisions and policies”. This will effectively curtail any plans to introduce private- member Bills or to amend legislation substantially as a way of sidelining the cabinet.
MPs now have to pledge in writing their submission to the “highest decision-making bodies of the ANC”. The ANC’s national conference and national executive committee (NEC) are identified jointly in the code as the party’s “highest organ”; decisions taken by these bodies “shall take precedence over all other structures, including our structures in parliament and government”.
The potential for conflict surfaced recently when it became known that members of the ANC contemplated bypassing the government of national unity (GNU) by amending legislation in the standing committees and having it accepted in the national assembly. Amid complaints that the National Party was allowed too much influence in cabinet decisions, dissident ANC MPs argued that parliamentary rules allowed the standing committees as much, if not more, power than the cabinet, which is constitutionally bound to consensus decision-making.
The power-sharing agreement on executive level, agreed to at the Kempton Park negotiations, has left many MPs high and dry, unsure of their role.
Justice standing committee chairman Johnny de Lange gave vent to their increasing frustration when he argued in the national assembly last month that the ANC caucus was not bound in any way to decisions taken by the GNU.
This outraged Nationalist MPs, who are accustomed to taking orders from the top. They insisted that Mandela regain “control of his caucus”.
Ramaphosa’s code of conduct is expected to restore some discipline. It was introduced by the national working committee of the NEC and MPs refusing to sign it before mid-October will automatically forfeit their positions.
The move ensures that Rama-phosa, who refused a cabinet position when Mandela did not offer him the job of deputy president, has firmly established his power base and gained in authority as secretary general of the organisation. He is also chairman of the constitutional assembly.
Differences in approach between Ramaphosa and ANC MPs surfaced this week at a meeting of the 46-member constitutional committee. ANC representatives vehemently objected to a management proposal which they saw as allowing too much power for the theme committees whose technical experts will be doing the “homework” in preparing the new constitution.
MPs Johnny de Lange, Baleka Kgositsile and Brigitte Mabandla argued in favour of shifting decision-making to the ANC-dominated constitutional assembly (CA).
Opposing a proposal by the Inkatha Freedom Party’s Walter Felgate that each theme committee draw up minority and majority reports, De Lange argued that committees should only collect viewpoints for submission to the CA.
Baleka argued that the document setting out the functions of the theme committees — drawn up by the CA’s management committee, which includes Ramaphosa — “should not be presented to these committees in its present form”.
“The CA must be the negotiating forum — not the theme committees,” said an ANC delegate. “We would like to carry the views of society. The process must be a legitimate one. We don’t want to be seen as gammatjies (jokers) by our supporters.”
Ramaphosa’s drive to establish discipline and adherence to the ANC hierarchy follows a concerted effort in the party’s parliamentary caucus to develop a more coherent stance. Party whips have acted sternly against MPs who got carried away with rhetoric in caucus meetings. Strict guidelines now focus caucus debates on specific topics, shutting out random lamentations.
Cabinet members have also been called to book. In an internal memo by Pierre Cronje, the ANC’s whip, ministers are told to follow protocol when visiting specific areas, and to invite MPs and standing committee members to accompany them.
“It is important that ordinary MPs are seen to be active in engaging the electorate and to be empowered by such official visits,” the memo states.