Some ANC national executive committee members believe that changes are needed in the procedure for the election of the party’s president, which should take place after an ”open campaign”.
The idea is that anyone interested in leading the ANC would declare their interest and openly campaign for the position, stating their policies and what they promise they would do once elected.
The argument is that the ANC’s current practice prevents many aspiring candidates from declaring their interest and availability. Existing practice, in terms of which leaders are nominated by branches and emerge from below, is seen as a legacy of an earlier era when the movement was banned. Today, what have we to fear from individuals declaring their interest and ÂÂcandidacy? ÂÂ
The argument is flawed. To start with, the ANC president holds no personal policy positions outside those adopted by the organisation. It is not the ANC that articulates the policies of the president; the reverse applies.
The implication is that no individual, no matter how strongly they feel they are ready to lead the ANC, is ready to do so until the branches say they are. For decades now, ANC members have ably identified those who are capable and ready to lead their movement and have exercised their duties responsibly.
The current arrangement in terms of which members identify, nominate and finally elect their president places them in the driving seat, where they can hold the president accountable and take responsibility for choosing him.
This has nothing to do with illegality. The ANC subscribes to collective leadership and revolutionary democracy and any practice that elevates individuals above the collective defies the fundamental principles on which it is based.
It is true that many people aspire to lead the ANC. But to allow them to be sprung as surprise candidates on ANC members, on the basis of their charisma and what they promise to do, would corrupt the movement’s culture.
ANC presidents are elected for many reasons, including the fact that they must have a strong track record in the movement. This enables members to gauge individuals and decide whether they can lead the ANC.
An ”open campaign” would favour the rich, who would have the resources to draft in the best campaign teams and marketing companies. This would transform the ANC into an American-style party, where gimmickry and individualism would win prominence over the collective.
Companies would position themselves to fund these campaigns and expect handsome returns from their candidates. Business interests would dominate, identifying and positioning people favourable to their interests.
Some people are genuinely concerned that stricter rules should govern how people campaign for the ANC presidency. In fact, the ANC needs to re-affirm its culture and established principles.
Liberals contend that this viewpoint negates the individual — but the ANC’s fundamental philosophy is itself not liberal. The movement allows the individual to play a full part within the broader milieu set by the collective.
Malusi Gigaba is Deputy Home Affairs Minister and NEC member