Ramaphosa caught between a rock and a hard place – The Economist

There is no doubt that President Cyril Ramaphosa is fighting a relentless propaganda war and that his enemies within the ANC have found the axe to wield their blows in the shape of Public Protector, Busisiwe Mkhwebane, which is ironically the same axe that the anti-Zuma faction employed to reveal state corruption and the Nkandla scandal. But the new holder of the position is a different kettle of fish. In another reversal of roles, Julius Malema who sided against Zuma, now bats for the Zuma-Magashule camp and supports Mkhwebane in her efforts to deal out blows to Ramaphosa and the constitutionalists. With Mkhwebane on the ropes as the Constitutional Court has branded her as a liar, it seems as Max du Preez writes in his latest article in Vrye Weekblad, that Malema and ANC Secretary-General Ace Magashule are now openly working together as they get more desperate. Malema dragged former Minister Derek Hanekom, another constitutionalist into the fray saying that Hanekom colluded with the EFF to get rid of Zuma. This weekend the ANC's National Executive Committee is meeting as Max du Preez writes, it remains to be seen whether Ramaphosa is going to try to throw oil on troubled waters or whether he will draw a line in the sand to end the faction fighting in his organisation. As The Economist points out in this article, the internal divisions in the ANC are preventing Ramaphosa from delivering on his promises of a New Dawn in South Africa. – Linda van Tilburg

By Thulasizwe Sithole

In an article in The Economist, the magazine writes that it has been another bad week for Ramaphosa as his enemies are "undermining his administration." The magazine refers to Ramaphosa as an avid cattle breeder but in the past week he must have felt that "he has rarely dealt with so much bull as in recent weeks." The latest accusation of the Public Protector that Ramaphosa violated the constitution by deliberately misleading Parliament is a "grave allegation'. Should this have merit, it would undermine the New Dawn that Ramaphosa is trying to achieve following the "kleptocratic rule" of Jacob Zuma for nine years. The Economist says the protector's arguments are "flimsy"; they should be considered as a "broad assault by Mr Ramaphosa's enemies."

The accusation against Ramaphosa relates to a payment of R500,000 from Bosasa to Ramaphosa's eldest son, Andile. The Democratic Alliance leader Mmusi Maimane unearthed evidence of the payment and challenged Ramaphosa in Parliament to set the record straight. The Economist says the president "could have gone away and check the facts. But he did not." Ramaphosa responded that he knew about the matter, had spoken to his son who assured him the money was for legitimate work. The President even said that if this was not the truth, "he would take Andile to the police himself."

___STEADY_PAYWALL___