African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL) president Fikile Mbalula was stung into action this week after the Mail & Guardian raised concerns that politics and big business make uneasy bedfellows.
What seemed to get under Mbalula’s skin was the M&G story entitled “Young Lions at it again”, published on January 28, about the ANCYL being embroiled in another tainted deal.
The story detailed how two companies with strong links to the ANCYL and the ANC in the Western Cape have emerged as beneficiaries of a disputed deal involving prime beachfront land.
What follows is Mbalula’s reply to the M&G.
Hypocrisy of the M&G exposed
For a while now, the ANCYL has endured sustained attacks on its character by the media, and the M&G in particular. This invective has continued unabated, despite our numerous objections to this campaign based on blatant lies.
In the article “One comrade, one company”, published on March 5 2004, the M&G suggested: “The argument is that the ANC leaders are also citizens free to do business; that to query their shareholdings is to encroach on private space. This is nonsense, because they are also leaders and paid officials of the ruling party.”
The depth of this statement, or rather lack thereof, reveals the naivety of the author. The ANC is not, by virtue of being a ruling party, a “multibillion” conglomerate that churns out endless cash.
In the same article, the M&G further suggested that “parties and their office bearers should be barred from business to get back to the trenches”.
In other words, leave business to private capital and remain in the trenches for the rest of your lives. Comrades are, therefore, not entitled to participate in the country’s economy, according to the M&G. A notion is fast developing in our society, and is being peddled by the media establishment, that being black and successful is unacceptable — more so when you are a young person with the remotest links to the ANCYL.
The stigma that is being attached to young black entrepreneurs is very dangerous and makes a mockery of our efforts to build a society that thrives on equal opportunities for all its citizens across the racial spectrum.
For too long, the media and private capital have sought to entrench the status quo and undermine any effort to bring previously marginalised sections of the population into the mainstream economy. Must we then stand on the sidelines and be spectators to the demise of the gains of our revolution? That is an option we are not prepared to entertain, whatever the cost.
South Africa has a Constitution that confers rights to all its citizens. An argument that by being associated with the ANCYL your rights should be diluted, as made by the M&G, is absolute hogwash.
Why is it that the M&G raised the question “whether it is acceptable for the ruling party’s youth wing to have business interests in companies that benefit from government opportunities”? Such a question presupposes that civil servants and other bodies that decide on awarding of tenders are under strict orders to award contracts to ANC-aligned tenderers.
If one applies a crude interpretation of this presupposition, it would therefore mean a vast majority of South Africans would indeed be “aligned” to the ANC as they voted for it overwhelmingly. Notwithstanding, such a suggestion is highly insulting to the intellect of innocent and hard-working civil servants who have committed themselves to earn an honest living.
If the question should be interpreted to mean that ANC-aligned tenderers should not bid for government-sponsored tenders, then perhaps we need to amend the Constitution to limit the freedom of association, and penalise those who choose to exercise this right across political formations, by banning them from business activity as suggested by the M&G.
We dare assert that our members have a constitutional right, like any other South African, to participate in the economic life of the country. The youth are the torchbearers of broad-based black economic empowerment, and therefore have the primary responsibility to ensure that it succeeds at all costs. We will not accept any argument that suggests otherwise.
In this regard, the media have become policemen, prosecutors and judges, and have therefore decreed that a member of the ANCYL is not entitled to participate in the country’s economic life as a free citizen. They [ANCYL members] must be bound by some fictitious rules that apply only to those whose political allegiance is to the ANC and its youth wing.
The ANCYL is an organisation with more than 500Â 000 members across the country. Any suggestion that all these dedicated South Africans should be marginalised and deprived of participation in the country’s economy should be rejected with the contempt it deserves.
It is therefore neither illegal nor immoral for the ANCYL, or any other organisation for that matter, to create investment units to ensure their sustainability. It is a fact that the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) and many others run successful investment wings based on exactly the same principle that Lembede [Investment Holdings, the ANCYL’s investment arm] is established. Why is it then that they are never placed under the kind of scrutiny the M&G has placed the ANCYL under?
In an article published on the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union (Sadtu) website, Harold Samuel — former national treasurer and honorary member of Sadtu, and chairperson of Sadtu Investment Holdings — explains how the union, taking its cue from other Cosatu unions, came to be involved in business.
“The following years found the union in agreement that Sadtu required an investment wing. Our sister affiliates in Cosatu had also moved in this direction and we were ready to follow. Soon after came the establishment of the Sadtu Investment Trust, which was managed by both past union leaders and leaders from the national executive committee.
“It was soon discovered that the trust itself could not give effect to the total financial aspirations of the union. What was now required was the setting up of a business company, which would be able to trade in the corporate world. We were lacking in the skills to compete in the market and decided to seek an experienced share partner. After much deliberation and careful advice, the union confirmed our share partnership with New Africa Investment Limited and Sadtu Investment Holdings.”
Indeed, the challenges that faced Sadtu in 1999, leading to the creation of its investment arm, are the same challenges facing the ANCYL.
The M&G has made a habit of parading the names of Songezo Mjongile, Andile Nkuhlu and Lunga Ncwana as faces of the ANCYL, who are then ridiculed and labelled as pawns fronting for Brett Kebble.
They have been portrayed as representing the quantum of the leadership of the ANCYL, thereby suggesting the leadership of the ANCYL lives by the M&G-invented philosophy of “One comrade, one BMW; one comrade, one tender”.
Surely, if that were the case, then every South African would want to become a member of the ANCYL? Fortunately, such a youth league only exists in the imagination of the M&G journalists. Basic arithmetic would have revealed to the M&G that two members out of 48 constitute a negligible portion of the ANCYL leadership collective.
It remains unclear to us why allegations relating to Lembede, Mjongile, Nkuhlu and Ncwana are linked to the ANCYL. It is only proper for the journalist to engage with them and establish the truth rather than seeking cheap glory by making wild allegations without giving the aggrieved parties an opportunity to clarify their positions.
It is important for us to clarify who these individuals are. Indeed, Nkuhlu and Mjongile are members of the national executive committee of the ANCYL, and therefore part of a 48-member strong collective.
Mjongile further serves as the chief executive of Lembede, and Nkuhlu is a director of Itsuseng Investments, a private company. Ncwana is MD of Itsuseng and an ordinary member of the ANCYL, among the more than 500Â 000 other members like him.
In an article titled “The ANC Youth League is embroiled in another tainted deal” published in the M&G of January 28 2005, a desperate attempt is made to portray the ANCYL as a corrupt organisation with scant regard for ethics. However, the article once again fails to advance a convincing case that the ANCYL has been party to any impropriety.
Indeed, Lembede may be an investment arm of the ANCYL, but to suggest that any and every business deal that involves a member of the ANCYL is necessarily a youth league deal and therefore cannot be above board is ludicrous. The sustained diatribe of the M&G is bound to fail, as the cracks in its well-orchestrated campaign to rubbish the ANCYL are starting to show.
Lembede as a company is accountable to a board of directors, which is bound by a code of ethics enshrined in company law and company prescripts. The fiduciary obligations of directors compel them to act in the best interest of the company in a manner that is consistent with the law at all times.
If the media suggest that there has been impropriety on the part of the board and it has reneged on its fiduciary obligations, then the board, not the ANCYL, must take responsibility for whatever shady deals Lembede is allegedly involved in.
But is this really the case? We think not. It is more of a desperate attempt to find fault where none exists and a despicable ploy to rubbish the ANCYL in the public arena by portraying it as a conglomeration of self-enriching individuals devoid of morals.
In another article, “How ANCYL leaders fronted for Kebbles”, published on March 19 2004, the M&G alleged that Lembede acquired a stake in Rand Leases, supposedly as a front for the Kebbles.
The same article confirms that the company Itsuseng Strategic Services actually acquired that stake. However, the article continues on its tirade against Lembede and the ANCYL in a manner devoid of any truth.
It is the sort of gutter journalism demonstrated by the M&G again and again that is dangerous to our democracy and places our hard-won rights as individuals and as society in jeopardy. The extremes of media freedom have never built any nation, but have served to undermine the very notion of free speech and democracy.
A question begs to be asked: Whose interests does the M&G represent? Is it genuinely concerned about the alleged abuse of political power by the ruling party or does it have a counter-revolutionary agenda that seeks to undermine the very founding ideals of our democracy?
We are convinced it is the latter. This is demonstrated by the persistent use of outright lies and half-truths projected as the truth, rather than rock-solid facts to rubbish the ANCYL.
The M&G has gone further to abuse deliberately the concept of private capital to rubbish members of the ANCYL and suggest they have capacity to make political deals in exchange for lucrative contracts.
South Africa needs to know that members of the ANCYL are not orphans of democracy who must be relegated to the background when opportunities for development and growth arise. Young people also deserve to be successful business people, and have an equal opportunity to become tomorrow’s millionaires.
We ask again: How much do Lembede or the individuals routinely touted by M&G as faces of the ANCYL account for in the overall state of South Africa’s economy? Have they become instant millionaires or we are simply using small fish to drive home a bigger political agenda? We think the latter holds true.
Our march towards youth emancipation requires of us to ensure that the task of deracialising our economy and securing meaningful youth empowerment proceeds in earnest. Broad-based black economic empowerment will never succeed without the youth playing a central and decisive role in altering South Africa’s national discourse for the better.
The youth represent the leaders of tomorrow, and we have an obligation to ensure that they are empowered and not deprived of opportunities to make them better leaders of tomorrow.
The hogwash the media continually feeds our nation must never be allowed to flourish and young people must close rank in defence of our democracy.