Skip to main content

His Mugabe moment? — On the backlash to President Jacob Zuma's power gra b (Hindu )

South African President Jacob Zuma’s power grab triggers a popular resistance

South African President Jacob Zuma may not have anticipated the strength of the backlash when he decided last week to dismiss his much-respected Finance Minister, Pravin Gordhan, and various other colleagues in a ministerial shuffle. On Friday, thousands of South Africans demonstrated peacefully across cities against Mr. Zuma’s action, which appears to have triggered concerns about government corruption and a tottering economy. Even ailing Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu made an appearance in support of the protesters, most of whom called for President Zuma to resign. Adding to the woes of the weakening South African economy, the rand fell immediately by more than 2%. Yet the prospect of Mr. Zuma stepping down appears unlikely. His cabinet clear-out is widely considered to be an attempt to control the selection of his successor in the African National Congress, which swept to power in 1994 under Nelson Mandela. Far from those glory days, the ANC today is split over the question of support for Mr. Zuma. Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa described the move as “totally, totally unacceptable”, and ANC general secretary Gwede Mantashe said the ministerial shake-up made him “jittery and uncomfortable”. Although Mr. Zuma’s government has been tainted by corruption scandals, he has granted himself more room for manoeuvre by moving Malusi Gigaba from the Home Affairs Ministry to Finance, despite the latter’s limited financial experience.

More troubling than the immediate question of Mr. Zuma’s control over the presidency and the ANC, however, is the fact that he presides over what seems to be a secular decline in the quality of governance and institutional integrity in South Africa. Last year the party suffered key losses in municipal elections, and Mr. Zuma was forced, by a Constitutional Court ruling, to reimburse public monies in a dispute over millions of dollars he allegedly spent on his private home. Since its early post-apartheid years, South Africa enjoyed the benefits of a strong constitutional ethos and a vibrant civil society. Yet it may be nearing what some analysts consider its “Mugabe moment”, a reference to neighbouring Zimbabwe, where a predatory state lines the pockets of the elites. The fact that Mr. Zuma portrayed the sacking of Mr. Gordhan as promoting “transformation” has a familiar echo in the tendency of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe to use the race card and project rent-seeking moves as necessary reforms for the deprived masses. If South Africans wish to place the country on a stable path to prosperity, they need to do more than seek the ouster of Mr. Zuma, for he has already laid the foundations for his ex-wife to take the reins of power. They need a second revolution aimed at discovering the kind of leadership that puts people first.

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i