ZIWAPHI • VOL 3 NO 24 • 4 - 17 DECEMBER  2009

Over the years since 1912, the African National Congress (ANC) has existed solely to unite African people against the barbaric and inhuman system of colonialism imposed by the western settlers in the African continent. This clarion call necessitated that Africans in particular, and blacks in general, must unite behind the vision and mission of the oldest movement of the people under the glorious banner: “Unity of Purpose”.

These, among other things, act as a uniting factor within the broader membership and supporters at large, even on the most trying of times with regard to serious ideological and fundamental differences within the organisation..

When JT Gumede, the erstwhile President of the ANC, visited the Soviet Union in 1929, he proclaimed “having seen the new Jerusalem”. In his view, he wanted to change the ideological outlook of the ANC unto the socialist ideology as practiced in the Soviet Union. At that time, this socialist view did not enjoy a popular support within the ANC; hence his ousting in the 1930 divisive annual congress of the ANC. However, this event-driven division could not distract the long term vision of the ANC – “Unity of Purpose”.

Even after the proclamation of the 1950 Suppression of Communism Act that subsequently led to the banning of the SACP (1950) and the ANC (1960), the ANC remained steadfast in the quest to liberate the people of South Africa as a minimum programme. The banning of the ANC led to deep frustration and distress within the membership and leadership of the ANC to a point where a crisis conference was called in Morogoro in 1969.

Though divisive, Morogoro did not lose the strategic objective of what the ANC stands for, to unite all the people of Africa, irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion, class and gender. Morogoro provided a strategic path to achieve this noble objective.

Why this background? It is important to clarify the historical foundation that sustained this glorious movement even in the most trying times in the revolution. It is also befitting to make a reflection of the past in order to gauge the present so that the path to the future can be paved. The central question will always be around whether we still have the unity of purpose or ours is a revolution gone wrong?

Prior 1994, the leadership role in the organisation came with a responsibility. It was not an easy thing for a member to accept leadership responsibility, because to lead the ANC involved sacrifice, detention, long-term jail sentence and the worst side of it included death. However, post 1994, leadership in the ANC comes with prestige, popularity and wealth or connection to state coffers. This is what divided the glorious movement because there is no more a distinction between leadership and those who should follow. We want to term this “an elevation of masses and lobbyists into leadership”.

It is worth clarifying that what sustained any organisation in the world are its tradition, culture and history. And those who are elevated to leadership should master these three important aspects – a phenomenon lacking in the ANC, ANCYL and ANCWL today.

The case study should be the Ehlanzeni Regional Executive Committee as elected in Matsulu in 2007 September which became a victim of a novice, poor political decision making in the organisation. In the event where the two lower structures are at loggerheads, in this case the REC and the PEC, the NEC becomes the ultimate intervener and its decision is binding to all lower structures. Those who sit in the NEC should be agents, provocateur and defenders of such a decision – an aspect that has been missing in the PEC of the ANCYL in Mpumalanga.

The REC has kept it on record that the disbandment of the Ehlanzeni REC of the Youth League symbolised a culture of a master and a servant approach that seemed to characterise the politics of the movement, particularly in Mpumalanga. In the master-servant relations, the Youth League is used as a pawn to achieve the ambitions of some of our senior leadership in the ANC [the so-called principals], to an extent that the decision to disband the REC was taken - not by the youth league - but by some within the ANC who viewed the existence of the REC as an obstruction towards “Endumbeni” (government complex), though the decision was processed in the PEC of the Youth League.

The master-servant relationship is a pure return to slavery; and the REC will not be party to such patronising, mind-colonising relationship. The launching of sub-regional structures fell short of proper organisational and constitutional processes. This is because those who serve the master are not expected to “lose” conferences; thus can do all they can to produce positive results as expected by the master. These sub-regional structures should be deemed unconstitutional and do not deserve the blessing of the real membership of the ANC.

The NEC of the ANCYL, in its 08 October 2008 ordinary meeting, resolved to set aside the disbandment of the Ehlanzeni REC. Instead, those who were tasked to communicate such a decision chose to perpetuate confusion in the structures for their myopic factional purposes. For whatever reason, the decision was never communicated to the REC. This delayed the REC to pursue its constitutional duty for the past 12 months or more.

Key amongst their lies and propaganda was their insinuation to the effect that members of the REC are surreptitiously affiliated to Cope, that the REC is not reinstated in defiance of the decision of the NEC. This propaganda was advocated by those who are new in the organisation, who despite that, were elevated to leadership positions without understanding the basic organisational processes. These individuals instilled a new culture in the organisation, which some of our new recruits see these tendencies as a normal organisational practice as long as it is done by the leadership (master).

These individuals confuse the decision and the subsequent processes. The decision of the NEC on the reinstatement of the REC is a principled decision based on both constitutionality and constitutional obligations. It has nothing to do with the conduct of individual REC members, that is, the processes solely rested on the REC to conclude.

In almost all REC post-reinstatement meetings, the issue of accusations of Cope was central to our discussion.

The REC thus noted that members join the organisation individually and not collectively and therefore, the REC cannot be collectively accused of being Cope. The REC started its process of probing those allegations against some of its members, resulting in the establishment of a team of two which was tasked with verifying the validity of the said accusations.

The team of two found two accusations on the members of the REC. On the first case, the REC took a principled decision that this member should, as per the constitution, rejoin in a branch and not in the REC. However, the REC further resolved that such a case must be referred to the PEC as such a member was welcomed back to the organisation through the office of the Provincial Secretary of the ANCYL during the time when the REC was in “political recess”.

On the second case, the REC could not find substantial evidence on the member involved; thus resolving that such was rumour-mongering and propaganda aimed at destroying the member and seeking to brand the entire REC as illegitimate.

By the way, it is not the duty of the REC [like other leaders of the ANC are doing] to recruit for Cope. So, it is not our responsibility to unleash sniffer-dogs to witch-hunt our members by spreading unfounded allegations against them. The ANC has managed to welcome National Party agents within its ranks, some of whom are even leading ANC structures that are far higher than branches. In fact, the duty of the REC is to recruit back those who, through misguided anger, defected to Cope.

The REC views such malicious and destructive rumour-mongering as a centrally engineered and coordinated activity by the forces of anti-progress some of whom took joy in the instability and disunity of the structures and membership of the organisation. These individuals cannot survive in a politically stable environment. In fact, they cannot pass  through-the-eye-of-the-needle means test. In our view, such counter-revolutionary tendencies are more dangerous than those of open opposition like Cope and DA, and are meant to subvert our movement from within.

Conclusion

Political imbecility and dwarfness have led to some individuals finding it correct to label a collective constitutional structure of our glorious youth movement as just another organisation which happens to be an opposition to that particular structure. This is the highest form of illogical, brain-drained and unprocedural conclusion.

It is on this basis that what characterised our deep divisions in the organisation is lack of unity and cohesion on what becomes our primary objective in the current epoch. Unlike during the dark era of our struggle, some among us take joy in weakening and dislodging our movement from its core constituency for cheap political expediency and quick access to state resources without carrying the interest of our masses at heart.

The reinstatement of the REC means a continuation of the Matsulu Congress resolutions and meeting the targets as set by the NEC. The REC will strive to build a strong ANCYL founded on the firm ideological theory of our movement through mass political education, memorial lectures and symposiums. We are steadfast in our view that we have always been on the correct path and shall not allow any distraction from convening a political congress in 2010.

GARRY NEVARI IS ACTING AS REGIONAL CHAIR OF THE ANCYL IN EHLANZENI REGION.

Politics of evil, lies and propaganda