What the Marius Fransman episode made clear is that, more than ever, party processes and structures will be subjugated to factional interests, writes Craig Dodds.
Cape Town - South Africans who put their cross next to the ANC at Wednesday’s polls may well ask themselves which ANC they are voting for.
There is the usual slippage between what a party stands for in the mind of the voter, informed by its history and manifesto and what it actually does once in power, as well as the distinction between the party and the individual candidates representing it - all of which is true for any political party.
But the ANC has in these elections been incapable of masking the deep fractures it carried into the campaign.
Will the voters be putting their trust in the ANC that resolved at its 2012 Mangaung conference that office bearers accused of impropriety should step aside until their cases were finalised?
Or will it be the ANC that, in the form of President Jacob Zuma and head of campaigns Nomvula Mokonyane, gave its blessing for the return of Western Cape provincial chairman Marius Fransman, while a report of the party’s integrity commission had yet to be dealt with by the disciplinary committee?
Will it be a vote for the party that reaffirmed the values of freedom of expression and of the media in the face of SABC censorship, or the party as represented by Communications Minister Faith Muthambi, who asked, “what censorship”?
Will it be a vote for the party as represented by those ready to murder its own councillor candidates in the hopes of filling their shoes one day, or the party that promised communities they would have a say in the selection of candidates?
At this stage it is unclear which ANC will emerge when the dust has settled after the polls and in many ways it is only once the results are in that the real political battle will begin.
The results themselves may have a huge bearing on the course of this battle for the soul of the party, which is so patently torn by competing visions of itself that even a vital elections campaign could not persuade its members to bury their differences.
What the Fransman episode made clear is that, more than ever, party processes and structures will be subjugated to factional interests whenever this is expedient.
It is not as though this is a new phenomenon.
It was, for example, only last year, after John Block’s conviction on corruption charges and following a protracted legal process during which he remained in office, that Block, former Northern Cape provincial chairman, finally resigned from all his positions.
By contrast, the expulsion of former Youth League leader Julius Malema stands as the most telling example of how effectively the party deals with those who cross the dominant faction, while fellow youth leaguer Pule Mabe has become a rising star in Parliament, despite a public protector report implicating him in wrongdoing at Prasa.
Examples abound, going all the way up to Zuma himself, who is technically (pending an appeal to the Constitutional Court by the NPA) indicted on 700-plus corruption charges following a high court judgment setting aside a decision to drop them.
Zuma’s tacit endorsement of Fransman may not be entirely unrelated to the distinct possibility that he will himself, sometime soon, find himself in the dock facing these charges.
Standing beside Fransman before he has even attempted to explain how he allowed himself to end up in the same bed as a junior employee, who subsequently accused him of sexual harassment, is a clear indication of how Zuma views the Mangaung resolution.
He will not go quietly, even if on trial for corruption.
The implications of this for the ANC are huge and go to the heart of the question of which ANC it is voters will be choosing in these elections.
Will the party be able to enforce its own position on disciplinary matters should its president defy that position?
Just as important as the message Zuma was sending by giving Fransman his blessing is the role the provincial chair would be expected to play in making sure the “right” delegates find their way to the ANC’s elective conference in December next year.
That he was willing to thumb his nose at Luthuli House in the middle of an election campaign by backing Fransman also indicates Zuma feels he will need those Western Cape delegates.
Given the province’s relative lack of voting clout compared to other ANC provinces, this in itself is an indication of how closely the battle will be fought.
It will also be bloody, because the stakes are enormous.
Control of the SABC for a president whose public image is in tatters - at least among those with access to sources of information other than the public broadcaster - is non-negotiable.
So is control over channels of patronage, an abundant source of which is the parastatals, whose financial health is simultaneously a major risk factor for the country’s sovereign credit rating.
Then there is the intended patronage bonanza of a mega nuclear build programme.
These matters will define the course of the ANC battle in the coming months, starting the moment the election results are in.
Whether or not those results inflict collateral damage on Zuma will be another critical factor. Together they will determine the future of the party, with which the future of the country remains inextricably bound.
Fasten your seatbelts.
Elections Bureau