Former president Jacob Zuma (Photo: Leila Dougan) 
The expulsion of Jacob Zuma from the ANC, which appears inevitable, would be a huge victory for President Cyril Ramaphosa – the last remaining senior public face of opposition towards him would have left the party, virtually of his own free will.
Still, there may be no truer indication of the difficult road ahead for the ANC this year than the sight of its secretary-general, Fikile Mbalula, telling the world that the ANC, including himself, had committed immoral acts to protect its former president, who has now, in Mbalula’s words, “expelled himself”.
At a press conference on Sunday, Mbalula said that in the past the ANC had been forced to defend Zuma. In particular, he said, the ANC had to lie to defend Zuma and falsely claim that the swimming pool at Nkandla was a “fire pool”.
Significantly, Mbalula also said that Zuma had now “expelled himself” from the ANC through his public campaigning for the new party called uMkhonto Wesizwe.
Intriguingly, while Mbalula is attacking Zuma for his immoral acts now, he did not do so at the time.
In 2010, when Zuma was at the height of his power, Mbalula told the ANC National Executive Committee (NEC) that the Guptas had told him he was going to be appointed to the Cabinet in 2010. But the NEC decided not to act.
Mbalula simply accepted the position and the powers that came with it, despite knowing that what had happened was wrong and that it was obvious the Guptas had captured the state through controlling Zuma.
Jump forward more than 13 years and Zuma’s decision to campaign for a new party leads to all sorts of questions.
It is perhaps the biggest signal yet that Zuma has comprehensively lost the battle within the governing party. It suggests he has no allies left and no power inside the corridors of the ruling party.
If it is no longer able to call itself uMkhonto Wesizwe, its leadership will find it difficult over the next few months to market another name that can convince voters to support it.
There is very little evidence that he is taking a significant chunk of support with him.
It is of course true that Zuma can still draw a crowd. But so far no one with a large constituency has said they will support the new party – and the only fact many voters will know about uMkhonto Wesizwe is that it is supported by Zuma.
The ANC is likely to win the upcoming court battle over the name of Zuma’s new political crush. If it is no longer able to call itself uMkhonto Wesizwe, its leadership will find it difficult over the next few months to market another name that can convince voters to support it.
Zuma’s own goal may become even more obvious.
Damaging information
It is entirely likely that ANC leaders decide not just to criticise Zuma, but to quietly release more damaging information about him to the public. Mbalula’s strong language about the former President may be just the start of what is to come, and could further weaken whatever negotiating position Zuma still has.
And, of course, as many other political movements have shown, forming a successful new party just before an election is extremely difficult. It requires talent, expertise, competence, money and charisma, most of which are sorely missing from Zuma’s already complicated equation.
For the ANC there may well be a political bonus from this affair.
It could argue, in an election year, that there is no greater symbol of its decision to renew itself than the expulsion from the party of a former leader, the person who led it through “nine wasted years”.
The fact that other people who were part of the Gupta agenda, such as Ace Magashule, have also left would strengthen this argument.
Zuma’s decision to join or form this new party rather than work with Magashule or even the EFF is significant — it suggests that there is no unity within this group.
It would appear to prove that despite public speculation that Zuma and EFF leader Julius Malema have a similar agenda, they cannot work together and will struggle to align their ambitions.
This is important because it means politicians campaigning on a populist platform of radical or revolutionary change are not forming a single powerful group just yet.
While it is clear that Zuma has broken the ANC’s rules by campaigning for another party, there is still a process that must be followed.
Some may believe this is the first time that Zuma has endorsed a political party other than the ANC.
But just before the 2019 elections, he welcomed a delegation from Black First Land First and was photographed with them. It was clearly an endorsement — and yet no action was taken by the ANC. While Zuma has gone further this time, it is an indication of just how strongly the wind has turned against him that things are moving so quickly.
Travails for Mbalula
But while the ANC can benefit from these developments, Mbalula faces a difficult series of tests.
As the party’s secretary-general, formally removing Zuma from the party will be his responsibility unless Zuma makes it easy and formally resigns.
While it is clear that Zuma has broken the ANC’s rules by campaigning for another party, there is still a process that must be followed. If it is not, Zuma could seek judicial intervention and further embarrass the party.
He could still try to attend NEC meetings (as a former leader he has the right, until expelled, to attend as an observer). Were he to do this, he could turn each NEC meeting into a public circus with him at the centre of it.
For Mbalula to simply say that Zuma has “expelled himself” from the ANC is not the legal end of the matter until those processes are completed.
Unfortunately, Mbalula has shown little regard for legal procedure in the past.
When former Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane found he had benefited improperly from money he received from a sporting goods supplier while he was minister of sport, his response was to ignore this.
When he was minister of transport he was told at a press conference that his decision to dissolve the board of Prasa and appoint a single administrator was illegal. Despite that, he pushed ahead, with the result that a judge ruled his action was illegal.
It is useful to contrast his treatment of procedure with how the ANC removed Malema from the party.
That disciplinary process took years, with evidence, appeals and applications. The lengthy process was deliberate and weakened Malema’s standing within the ANC.
But it meant that when he was formally expelled (in an appeal process overseen by the ANC’s National Disciplinary Committee of Appeal chaired by Ramaphosa) the process was accepted by ANC members as final and legitimate.
It can be argued that the case of a former leader of the party should be handled with at least as much care.
No matter what happens next, for many in the ANC, Zuma’s actions are a betrayal. They will believe that first, he used the ANC to help his friends and his family and to loot the country. And now he has again, and finally, betrayed the ANC for his narrow agenda.
Expect much more high emotion around the man who dominated our politics for many years. DM