It’s been suggested that the direct election of the president (who at present is elected by the parliament) would lead to more accountable and responsible government. But America just directly elected Donald Trump, while Zimbabwe continues to directly elect Robert Mugabe. Presidential elections are no panacea.
The lesson from other African countries is therefore a worrying one: the road back is a long one.
But these comparisons shouldn’t lead to defeatism.
There are a number of ways in which the country remains distinctive.
Civil society remains more robust than in many other states, and more independent as the Confederation of South African Trade Union’s criticism of Zuma demonstrates.
Similarly, the judiciary tends to be both of higher quality and more impartial, while the governing ANC itself has more internal checks and balances than most governments on the continent.
These features didn’t prevent the slide towards patrimonialism, and on their own they will not topple Zuma.
But they are the foundations on which the struggle for a new South Africa can be fought.
By Nic Cheeseman. This article is reproduced from The Conversation
(338 VIEWS)
