Sisulu’s constitutional attack is misplaced

Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu has, for the past week or so, been with great enthusiasm trashing the constitution and the judiciary, in a barrage of articles, social media posts and public declarations.

This “beautiful constitution”, Sisulu said, is no more than a “palliative” which has failed to rescue the “victims of colonialism” from a “sea of poverty”. She reserved particular scorn for the now transformed judiciary’s constitutional role. Black judges, she said, are “mentally colonised” and “confused by foreign belief systems”. Akin to America’s “house Negroes”, they “lick the spittle” of whites and when made “leaders or interpreters of the law … are worse
than [their] oppressors”.

Such behaviour is unheard of from a serving Cabinet minister who swore an oath to abide by and uphold the constitution. So it’s most unusual that Sisulu continues to serve in President Cyril Ramaphosa’s present Cabinet.
What makes it particularly bizarre is that Sisulu is the newest standard bearer for the temporarily sidelined radical economic transformation faction.

ALSO READ: ‘It’s not what we agreed on’ – Lindiwe Sisulu distances herself from Presidency’s statement

This is the movement that is championing the interests of disgraced former president Jacob Zuma and his clique, seeking to unseat Ramaphosa and his reformists. Anywhere else in the world, she’d be out on her ear as a disgrace to the party and the nation.

Timid Cyril’s response has been characteristically, well, timid. But Sisulu’s intemperate remarks did cause consternation elsewhere. Acting Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, while defending the right of anyone to level substantiated criticism against judges, called Sisulu’s remarks “probably the worst insult that has been levelled against the judiciary in democratic South Africa”.

Sisulu’s conduct was “completely unacceptable” and he added “it would be a pity if it was allowed to stand just like that”.

Justice Minister Ronald Lamola said that “referring to judicial officers by using crude racial tropes cannot pass off as a debate” and that “attacking the very institution that is to uphold the constitution goes against the grain of everything”, especially since “our constitution is largely based on the [ANC’s] Freedom Charter”.

However, Lamola also opened some convenient wriggle room for the ANC. He noted in his rebuttal that her articles were part of “heightened debates on the efficacy of the constitution, propelled by Minister Sisulu in her personal
capacity”. In other words, no need to discipline or fire her.

ALSO READ; Lindiwe Sisulu retracts ‘unsubstantiated’, ‘inappropriate’ comments on judiciary

Part of Ramaphosa’s problem is that Sisulu’s comments will have some resonance among the growing mass of poverty-stricken South Africans. For Sisulu is absolutely correct that the constitution has not lifted the masses from poverty and given them work. But that is not what constitutions do. That’s what governments do.

Sisulu is not alone in the ANC as seeing the constitution as simply a convenient tool that the “people’s party” can use, rejig or discard, as best it suits the ANC’s shifting objectives. Democrats, in contrast, see a national constitution as a mechanism not for implementing immediate passions, but rather for safely containing them.

Instead, we need to have a president and government that is aware that problem lies in execution. And that responsibility lies with the ANC.