Clyde Ramalaine
Charles Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities reminded us: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair.”
With more than five weeks to go to the ANC’s 55th Conference, where potentially new leaders will emerge to lead the ANC, it marks perhaps the best of times and equally connotes the worst of times. Generally, election seasons are silly, but what we are contending with marks a perilous moment when an ANC politician can threaten INL editor Sifiso Mahlangu with assassination for doing his job. We all know the fight for press freedom was one won with the blood of martyrs.
What kind of society are we? What type of democracy is this where some ANC politicians can’t be asked to explain themselves when they stand accused of the claims levelled against President (Cyril) Ramaphosa and his political adviser Mr Bejane Chauke? These are allegations that have their origin as first cited in both the Arthur Fraser independent affidavits submitted in June and subsequently contained in the leader of UDM Bantu Holomisa’s submission to the Parliament-appointed Section 89 Panel investigating Ramaphosa breached his constitutional office with the Phala Phala alleged crimes?
I understand that INL published their story after the Holomisa submission, which went around social media platforms like wildfire. Ordinarily, before the media publishes such claims, they would extend an invitation and opportunity to those implicated to give their version. I understand that INL did precisely that since its editor claims they solicited Chauke’s account, which he declined. However, Chauke later wrote a lengthy piece addressed to the editor in which he disowned some of the information in the Holomisa submission.
Perhaps important to note is that when INL published this following the Holomiisa submission, presidential political adviser Bejane Chauke did not threaten the media outlet with any legal action; instead, he wrote a response refuting some of the allegations contained in the Holomisa submission.
The idea of Chauke opting to respond to INL instead of following a legal channel of bringing a libel case against the media outfit baffled me when I considered his response. On another score, he may have chosen to exercise his right of reply, a standard practice in media spaces. Yet the INL also confirms Chauke never asked for a right of reply. He thus merely wrote a response to refute some of the claims while he concedes, for example, to have travelled extensively given his official advisory role for the president.
Having sketched the vibrating background for Mamabolo’s WhatsApp communication which now has earned him a case opened at the Sandton Police, it is time to turn to the actual content of the Mamabolo messages.
According to the cited WhatsApp as published by INL, Mamabolo allegedly says, “Aowaa mon (No man) Mo tologele nyana (leave him alone).“
When Mahlangu says he has no idea what Mamabolo is referring to, he allegedly says, “Leave him alone abit. You are my frnd and I don’t want Pple to Assassinate you. Bcos it can happen anytime from now” (sic).
Reading MP Boy Mamabolo’s whatsApp messages to Editor Mahlangu, which sends chills down one’s spine, one is compelled to ask precisely who, according to Mamabolo, will instruct the assassination.
Yet even before engaging, why Mamabolo would send such a message begs the question: Do the alleged crimes levelled against Chauke not trouble ANC leader and MP Boy Mamabolo? If not – why not? Where is the moral line for a Mamabolo? Are we to surmise that Mamabolo stands neutral and unperturbed in moral consciousness on the Phala Phala saga and its unfolding litany of challenges? With its ramifications for Ramaphosa or Chauke and the ANC – presidential leadership? Why would Mamabolo want Chauke to be left alone? We could interpret Mamabolo’s idea of Chauke being left alone in several ways.
Is Mamabolo asking for a favour from the editor in which his friendship with the editor is the currency? We know at least Mamabolo is not saying the publishing of the information on Chauke was wrong, and neither is he questioning Holomisa for making it available through his submission. Supposedly Mamabolo sees this as a personal attack on Chauke. Why would he not engage the original submissions but choose to engage the INL editor?
Perhaps where Mamabolo needs to catch up is his misreading of the prevalence of a Chauke in our South African discourse, particularly this season. Chauke’s presence in our discourse in this season comes at least three-fold. First, he is the known political adviser to the ANC and SA president, making him the most trusted lieutenant of Ramaphosa. He is cited and implicated in (the affidavit) Arthur Fraser opened at the Rosebank police station in June. He is also in the subsequent affidavit of Fraser and is explicitly mentioned and implicated for being directly linked to the stash of monies found at Phala Phala and for having brought large amounts of foreign currency from various trips he undertook on behalf of his principal in the subsequent affidavit that Fraser submitted.
The Holomisa submission to the Parliament-initiated Section 89 inquiry panel draws from the second affidavit of Fraser. Third, and perhaps more importantly for ANC and SA citizens, the same man accused of the earlier mentioned crimes is on an ANC slate to be a contestant for a top six position in the 55th Conference, which starts on December 16.
Chauke is actively campaigning to be trusted into the office to lead the ANC at its highest level, making him a man of interest. He may emerge as an ANC leader, albeit with dark clouds hanging all over him for the earlier cited case and subsequent affidavit in which he is mentioned. The aforementioned justifies public interests in him as a person and his affairs.
Therefore if Mamabolo is asking Mahlangu to leave Chauke alone – is Mamabolo doing this purely from caring for Chauke, or was this matter of Mahlangu’s INL media prying on Chauke discussed which resulted in his WhatsApp? We will not know.
Unless Chauke disowns Mamabolo’s claims as egregious and grossly insulting to him, we dare not assume that Mamabolo acted in these WhatsApp messages without engaging him. If Mamabolo, after sending Mahlangu the messages, forwarded the same to Chauke and he did not distance (himself) or condemn such messaging in his interest, logic would indicate Chauke wanted Mahlangu to get such messages.
If Chauke is not part of this, he ought to have upon first awareness disown and condemn that, rebuking Mamabolo. Furthermore, he should have immediately laid a criminal charge against Mamabolo since the latter more than implies that if Mahlangu does not relent and leave Chauke alone, but continues publishing or investigating Bejane, he could be assassinated.
Mamabolo’s WhatsApp messages purports to be looking out for a friend, in this instance Mahlangu, yet it nowhere problematises the issue of assassinations as unacceptable, barbarism, unlawful and not part of ANC or South African constitutional diaphragms. Nowhere in the messages are we reading of Mamabolo as a human being and ANC leader and MP decrying that assassinations are neither correct nor acceptable in our society. ANC members and South Africans must enquire what kind of ANC leader warns someone of assassination and lacks the moral judgement to condemn such practices regardless of where and when they may manifest.
What must we conclude from Mamabolo’s saying because it (implying Mahlangu'’ assassination) can happen any time from now? Is Mamabolo categorically asserting post his WhatsApp messages to Mahlangu, the latter can fall prey to an assassination now? Is this meant to be a final intervention-cum-warning from a friend? Is it someone who already knows of a hatched plan and is privy to such information to be executed? Was he part of the team that agreed, or was he chosen to convey the message via WhatsApp because he is a friend? These are all the questions a mere few lines of WhatsApp messages open up, and an investigation will have to engage.
I still hold that the only way Chauke can disown this assassination threat is to also lay a charge against Mamabolo for accusing him of having the potential to assassinate Mahlangu. Since, God forbid, if anything happens to Mahlangu, he will be a person of interest number one because these WhatsApp (messages) were sent for his interest, albeit by Mamabolo.
In October, Thabo Mbeki, in a Strategic Dialogue Group session, lambasted the ANC for being led by criminals. Mbeki said, “When you talk renewal of the ANC, you’re carrying too much baggage of wrong people. You have to have the courage to face that you have a renewed ANC led by criminals.”
In an October op-ed entitled “Will the ANC allow the championing of its renewal by an alleged criminal and corrupt Ramaphosa and his cohort? I contended, ”Ramaphosa and his cohort of coattail riders find it increasingly challenging to continue propagating his leadership as fit to lead the anti-corruption campaign organisational renewal and unity as its tenants.“
The proverbial elephant in the room, among others, remains the unfolding criminal and constitutional investigations led by several entities.
In August, we witnessed whistle-blower Babita Deokaran killed for her information on Gauteng’s health expenditure. As late as a few days (November 4) ago, we learnt of another whistle-blower Marumo Eric Phenya who was gunned down after flagging a dodgy multi-million-rand home affairs tender. He uncovered irregularities involving a company that provided IT solutions to the department.
We also know that some politicians in the Northern Cape are more interested to know who the whistle-blowers are for the Dawid Kruiper Municipality’s SCM (Supply Chain Management) policies and processes violations. A whistle-blower raised a case with the SIU, which Premier Zamani Saul is sitting on since it implicates provincial secretary Deshi Nxganga.
The threat of Mahlangu’s assassination plays out at a time when we continue hearing of people dying, from whistle-blowers to politicians; now editors get threatened. This is the deplorable criminal, thug life and precarious space ANC elections seasons have become. Who is next? Indeed Dickens’s observation holds; it is a time of radical and some instances, dangerous opposites unfolding simultaneously.
Clyde NS Ramalaine is a political analyst, commentator and anchor analyst for AfricaNewsGlobal.