Should Enoch Godongwana decide to resign as finance minister, President Cyril Ramaphosa will face a difficult decision.

Some 10 days ago it became public that Godongwana had been accused of sexual assault by a masseuse — it’s understood she had given him a massage at a resort in the Kruger National Park. He strongly denies the claims, saying that his wife also received a massage at the same time, in the same room.

He also says that if he is charged by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), he will step aside from his position.

Meanwhile, it has been reported that the police first submitted a docket to the NPA, and were then told to take a warning statement from Godongwana. A warning statement is usually a statement given to the police under the warning that it could be used against you in court — it is a standard part of the process. But the fact that the police had to hear his side of the story may mean that, based on the woman’s version, he does have a case to answer.

On Monday, Bloomberg reported that the NPA was preparing to make a decision on the case.

All of this is taking place as calls are mounting for the government to finally lead society in taking action against gender-based violence.

The organisation Wise4Afrika wrote to Ramaphosa asking him to remove Godongwana from his post.

A member of the ANC Youth League’s Task Team, Thuthukile Zuma, also demanded that Godongwana be removed. She is the daughter of former president Jacob Zuma and Cogta Minister Dr Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma.

As a very well-informed friend pointed out, this is possibly the first time the child of a serving Cabinet minister has demanded the resignation of another Cabinet minister.

On Tuesday, EFF leader Julius Malema also called on Godongwana to leave Cabinet.

All of this puts Ramaphosa in a complicated and extremely messy position.

If he removes Godongwana but the NPA decides not to lay charges, Godongwana can claim that he has been treated unfairly. It is also likely that if he does leave there will be adverse effects on our markets and the battered economy.

It would also be exceedingly difficult for Ramaphosa to appoint an acting minister — markets treasure stability above all and any disruption could have consequences.

But that doesn’t and shouldn’t delegitimise the demands of those who feel that a man accused of assault in this way should not be part of the Cabinet.

This also lands squarely on what is still a live debate about the ANC’s “step-aside” rule.

Its critics say any office-bearer in the ANC who is accused of wrongdoing could end up losing their job unfairly. Were Ramaphosa to remove Godongwana, only for him to be legally cleared later, this could well embolden those, like the ANC in KwaZulu-Natal, who want the rule scrapped.

Visit Daily Maverick’s home page for more news, analysis and investigations

A contested position

Meanwhile, it should not be forgotten just how contested, and important, the position of finance minister has been in our recent history.

Even before the official start of democracy in SA in 1992, the last apartheid president, FW de Klerk, felt it important to appoint a person seen as politically neutral to the position. Derek Keys was asked to join the Cabinet from the business world. When Nelson Mandela became President he retained Keys in his Cabinet for a few months.

After Keys resigned for personal reasons in 1994, the ANC felt it was important to retain neutrality in the post, appointing the politically non-affiliated Chris Liebenberg.

When Trevor Manuel was finally appointed in 1996, there were huge concerns from some in the monied classes about whether this would be the beginning of the end of financial discipline by the SA government.

Instead, partly because a new institution called the SA Revenue Service started to get more income for the fiscus, the ANC government managed our finances incredibly carefully. Manuel remained in the position until 2009, when he was replaced by Pravin Gordhan.

But it was really during Zuma’s second term as president that this position became contentious again.

This is the period that saw Zuma’s surprise decision to remove Nhlanhla Nene from the position in December 2015, the four days of Des van Rooyen, the reappointment of Pravin Gordhan, the fraud charges brought against Gordhan by Zuma’s allies in the Hawks and the NPA, and ultimately, Zuma’s appointment of Malusi Gigaba to the position in March 2017.

All of this was not a political struggle in the classic sense, as it was not about differing ideological positions but rather about the control of money.

But even when Ramaphosa became President, there were surprises to come.

When he symbolically reappointed Nene to the position he could not have expected that Nene would have to resign several months later.

The fact that Ramaphosa had a limited number of options then was displayed when he had to use his powers of persuasion to convince Tito Mboweni, a former Reserve Bank governor and labour minister, to rejoin the government. This revealed that there were no members of the top leadership of the ANC whom he wished to appoint to the position, and who would accept the offer. 

Ramaphosa needed a person the markets knew and trusted. There are barely a handful of people able to answer that call.

When Mboweni finally got his wish to leave the position and take up cookery last year, Ramaphosa appeared to be making a strategic move by appointing Godongwana. He had been the chair of the ANC’s socioeconomic transformation commission for more than a decade. This made it difficult for Ramaphosa’s detractors in the ANC to oppose the choice. And again, he was a person investors knew.

However, were Godongwana to leave the position now, Ramaphosa may have very few options.

The deputy finance minister, David Masondo, has kept a relatively low profile in that position and was passed over by Ramaphosa when he appointed Godongwana. Also, while Masondo denies the claims, he was accused of trying to force a woman to have an abortion.

While no finding was ever made against Masondo, the nature of the claims may make it difficult for Ramaphosa to now appoint him to replace a man accused of assaulting a woman.

At the same time, our relatively fragile economy (which is more exposed than most to international money flows), and the symbolic nature of the position mean that finding a person who is acceptable to the majority of the ANC and to the markets may be close to impossible. 

This may result in Ramaphosa moving against Godongwana only if he absolutely has to (or if Godongwana resigns).

However, despite suggestions that Ramaphosa would prefer not to make any changes to his Cabinet before the December ANC conference, if Godongwana is formally charged, he will have no choice in the matter. DM