It was just impossible for speakers at Ahmed Kathrada's funeral not to eulogise Kathy without sounding like denouncing Zuma, writes Mcebisi Ndletyana.
“On a day like this, we should not mince words. We should say it like it is.” Kgalema Motlanthe began his eulogy to Ahmed Kathrada at his burial on Wednesday. The mourners applauded in approval, as if they were urging him on to speak especially on the events preceding Kathrada’s death in the early hours of Tuesday morning.
Just the previous day we had woken up to news that President Jacob Zuma had instructed Pravin Gordhan to return from his international trip immediately. Minister of Finance, Gordhan, was on a tour to woo investors. His was a marketing trip to convince investors that all was fine in our country and that those in authority would do all they can to make sure that their investment grows.
That was all undone by Zuma’s summoning of Gordhan, whose trip he had approved. This was an unprecedented act of humiliation by a president. Thus expectations that Motlanthe should comment on the latest round of presidential misconduct were inevitable. Whilst sad, funerals are also moments of reflection. Mourners examine the life of the dead. They do so both in celebration and to tease out lessons for the living.
Dedicated to the cause of liberation from youth, Kathy’s life was indeed worth celebrating. Mourners were keen to express their gratitude to a man who had surrendered his own freedom so that we could gain ours. His life was a lesson worth examining, on the occasion of his burial, in order to highlight the standards that those who purport to be leaders must meet.
Inescapably, Kathy’s biography became a critique of the current leadership. His was a transformative leadership.
According to the former president of the republic, Motlanthe, Kathy exemplified what the poet Henry van Dyke meant when he said: “There is a loftier ambition than merely to stand high in the world. It is to stoop down and lift mankind a little higher”.
Kathy, Kgalema explained, “made us believe in our inherent ability to create a totally new reality”. Zuma’s leadership doesn’t come anywhere close to what Kathy represented. It is actually the antithesis, as Motlanthe told fellow mourners, marked by a “culture of feeding frenzy, moral corruption, societal depravity, political dissolution, the gross and sleaze enveloping human mind that would put to shame even some of the vilest political orders known to human history”.
It was just impossible for speakers at the funeral not to eulogise Kathy without sounding like denouncing Zuma. They did not even have to direct any harsh words towards Zuma. His own secretary-general, Gwede Mantashe, was unusually lucid about the need for ethical leaders. He said Kathy was neither corruptible nor devious - an exemplar of the calibre of leadership needed by the ANC.
Mantashe even admitted that there’s a lack of visionary leadership. Directing his words to the former president, Thabo Mbeki, he said: “sagqibela kudala ufuman’ i-line, Comrade Thabo”. The organisation is unhinged, wielded by the unscrupulous within as an instrument to gorge on public resources, instead of animating society to realize its full potential.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the Kathrada Foundation would not have Zuma speak over Kathy’s body. Zuma didn’t deserve that honour; and also knew that Kathy considered him undeserving of the presidency. That explains why he didn’t attend the funeral - his ilk was unwelcome there.
Conversely, the funeral proceedings validated Pravin Gordhan. He was given a standing ovation. The Director of the Kathrada Foundation, Neeshan Balton, told mourners how keen Kathy was to accompany Gordhan to court in his battles with the Gupta family.
That’s because Gordhan is a bearer of Kathy’s values, as Balton reassured him: “Pravin, irrespective of whether you are minister or not in the days or weeks to come, you remain true to the values and principles that Ahmed Kathrada would be proud of.”
Essentially, Kathy’s funeral was both an affirmation of Gordhan’s stewardship of his ministry, on the one hand, and a reiteration of the rejection of Zuma, on the other hand.
And, when Zuma summoned Gordhan to return home on Monday, he didn’t anticipate his plan to fire Gordhan being thwarted by Kathy’s death. He was certainly going to fire Gordhan, but couldn’t bring himself to doing so just as the nation was mourning the death of a loved figure who thought highly of Gordhan. Firing Gordhan would have been akin to defiling Kathy’s memory, which would have earned him even more public ire.
People are pained. Kathy’s passing on has just reminded them of the dearth of leadership, which is exemplified by the mere fact of Zuma being president.
What this shows also is that, whilst Zuma has the prerogative to hire and fire ministers, his decisions are subject to public judgement - partly because such decisions have consequences that impact on all of us. The public learnt this the hard way with the firing of Nhlanhla Nene.
This has consequently triggered an interest in cabinet re-shuffles to guard against another act of presidential sabotage.
And the public now knows that Zuma has been trying to get rid of Gordhan to enable a take-over by a ‘parasitic patronage network’, as Blade Nzimande said. Zuma will not stop with his infamy. He is beholden to interests other than the republic. The question is: how much damage will he have wrought onto the republic by the time he is stopped, if at all?
* Ndletyana is associate professor of politics at the University of Johannesburg.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.