William Gumede: This fiasco doesn't clear him – or the ANC
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.ANC President Jacob Zuma, a man famous for easy speech and a ready song, was yesterday "emotional" and "speechless" when the charges against him were dropped. He was evidently relieved that he was finally "cleared" of the cloud of corruption allegations that have dogged him for years now.
But the dubious manner in which the corruption charges against Mr Zuma were cancelled is unlikely to clear his name, or restore his credibility. In fact, it is likely to further undermine him. Only defending himself fully in court will restore his reputation, and that of the ANC.
Twice now, South Africa's "Teflon" politician has been cleared of corruption charges on procedural or technical grounds. But when prosecutor Mokotedi Mpshe dropped the charges yesterday, he made it clear that their substance has not been challenged.
Mr Mpshe said the case against Mr Zuma was dropped because a prosecutor appeared to have taken political instructions from opponents of the ANC president.
But the transcripts of the conversations do not prove his innocence. Surely the prosecuting authorities should have allowed the courts to pronounce whether they could be trusted.
Simply put, they seem to have buckled under the pressure. In 2006, Mr Zuma's lawyer, Kemp J Kemp, outlined the ANC president's scorched-earth political and legal strategy to quash his corruption charges: "We [will] fight them in every room and in every street."
This meant Zuma supporters almost daily attacked the media, the judiciary and prosecuting authorities, marching against them, and portraying them as "counter-revolutionary" or as the "enemy" that must be eliminated, to intimidate them into submission.
It appeared that for Mr Zuma and his backers, it did not matter whether democratic institutions were battered in the process, their priority was to quash the corruption charges.
The way in which the prosecution has crumbled under the pressure suggests that that strategy was successful. The credibility of South Africa's prosecuting authorities is now also in tatters. ANC leaders who celebrated Zuma's acquittal do not appear interested in the damage done to South Africa's democratic institutions. If Mr Zuma wins the elections on 22 April, which is more than likely given the paucity of the opposition, he will have presidential power, but he will lack the moral authority to go with it.
William Gumede is the author of the forthcoming book, 'The Democracy Gap: Africa's Wasted Years' (Zed Books)
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments