The ANC’s Electoral Committee told former ANC Women’s League leader Bathabile Dlamini and current NEC member Tony Yengeni, they are not able to contest for positions on the ANC’s NEC because of their serious criminal convictions (there may still be question marks around at least one other potential candidate, Mduduzi Manana). 

Their disqualifications may be important as to which direction the governing party takes after its elective conference, which begins on Friday. In short, the soul of the party, and whether people who have been found guilty of wrongdoing can still play a leadership role could be decided on these two not being able to throw their hats into the ring. At some point in the near future, the composition of the current NEC and the balance of power nationally could be decided by these removals — and pose legal questions about whether a voluntary association can act in this way.

In August, the ANC’s Electoral Committee published its rules and guidelines ahead of this conference. It was foreseeable then that both Dlamini and Yengeni may not be able to contest for another shot at NEC positions.

In fact, it could have been foreseen even earlier than that. In June, the committee’s chair, Kgalema Motlanthe, gave a series of interviews at the ANC’s policy conference in which he said he believed the ANC’s constitution should be enforced. And that would mean that people convicted of a serious offence should be expelled from the ANC, never mind be allowed to stand for a leadership position.

Since then, there was no protest or move against the rules. This could be crucial, as the committee may now argue it is simply applying rules that were accepted by everybody.

Of course, the problem that Yengeni and Dlamini may have had is that they did not want to draw attention to themselves, and to argue against the rules in advance would have been difficult. But this latest move has pushed them into a seriously weakened position. One wonders if Yengeni did object when the rules were adopted by the NEC. 

Dlamini has already said she will challenge the rules in court. Her attorney will have to argue in open court that she should be allowed to contest, despite being found guilty of lying under oath to a court. That would also remind voters of what she was lying about: the provision of social grants to the poorest of the poor in our society.

At the same time, the ANC is a voluntary organisation. One could imagine the consequences if its rules were overruled by a court. For example, could a court force such an organisation to accept certain people, despite what may be serious crimes in their past? For a political party, that would surely be unacceptable — if it cannot decide who is in its leadership, it would lose control of itself. 

That said, perhaps a key argument that her lawyers could make would be around Mduduzi Manana. The former deputy minister of higher education was caught on video assaulting a woman in the parking lot of a nightclub in 2017. He pleaded guilty and paid a fine.

If it is the case that Manana is allowed to contest, Dlamini’s lawyers could argue that this is inconsistent, that someone guilty of an act of violence is allowed to contest, while someone guilty of lying is not.

But Manana’s position is not clear. The secretary of the ANC’s Electoral Committee, Chief Livhuwani Matsila, refused to answer a question about whether Manana would be eligible, while speaking to Newzroom Afrika on Monday afternoon.

Which means there may be more surprises in store.

However, it is likely that Dlamini’s legal case will not get past the starting gate. This is because the Electoral Committee says she has not yet used their own internal appeal mechanism. And any court is likely to throw out such an application until she can prove she has used up every internal instance of appeal first.

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

Yengeni’s complex position

Meanwhile, Yengeni is in a complex position.

As far as is known, he has played an active role in recent NEC meetings. When Ace Magashule was suspended from his position, Yengeni publicly defended him in a series of television interviews.

But now, he seems to be able to play a role, while everyone around him knows that he should never have been eligible in the first place.

Yengeni has been a member of the NEC for at least the past 15 years. It leads to the question: how different could the ANC have been if Motlanthe’s suggestion had been taken up, and the party’s constitution implemented, barring people like Yengeni from playing any role in leadership discussions since at least 2007?

While it is easy to suggest that Yengeni has only been one member of the NEC during that time, he may have had a disproportionate effect.

This is because of his behaviour on Twitter, in which he insulted at least one sitting party leader and generally made it impossible to enforce discipline. This was an NEC member who often publicly undermined the decisions of the NEC.

(Of course, he was not the only one, Tito Mboweni and many others took NEC arguments to Twitter, to the detriment of the ANC.)

Meanwhile, there are other issues to ponder over this decision.

Ramaphosa’s opponents fall foul of rules

As many have noted, it appears that it is only those who oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa who seem to fall foul of the rules in the ANC. Certainly, Dlamini and Yengeni have been vehemently opposed to his agenda. 

And on Monday afternoon came confirmation that Ramaphosa’s leading heckler, Carl Niehaus, had been expelled from the party (he claims to be appealing against this decision). 

There are likely to be many arguments about these moves. The ones on the receiving end will claim they are proof of an agenda, and that Ramaphosa is using the executive machinery of the ANC to crush the internal opposition to his second term.

But his supporters will argue the rules are there to be respected, and no one should be surprised when they are (finally) applied.

This gets to the heart of the Electoral Committee. It was instituted to ensure a neutral body ran the ANC’s elections process (the actual elections are run by an independent body which is an offshoot of the Electoral Commission of South Africa).

So far, it has never happened that one significant leader or group of leaders in the ANC has refused to accept the outcome of an election. But if that were to happen, it is possible that there would be utter chaos in the movement, chaos from which it may not recover.

In the meantime, a much bigger battle may well be under way, on the scale of the debate over the “step-aside” resolution.

If the ANC cannot stop people with criminal convictions from contesting for positions, it would allow thieves to take over the party, and possibly South Africa.

And this is why these decisions are really crucial to the ANC, as painful as they may be. If it cannot implement internal structures’ decisions, it will continue its slide, possibly all the way into an electoral loss. DM