ANC Today --------------------------------------------------------------------- Volume 2, No. 38, 20 - 26 September 2002 --------------------------------------------------------------------- THIS WEEK: * Letter from the President: Sceptics will not stop the re-building of Africa * Electoral systems: Structures join debate on best system to reflect the will of the people * SABC: Public broadcaster should be directed by public need --------------------------------------------------------------------- LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT Sceptics will not stop the re-building of Africa Earlier this week, on September 16, the United Nations General Assembly sat as a "High Level Special Session of the UN General Assembly on NEPAD". For the entire day, the nations of the world focused exclusively on Africa and its future. At the end of its deliberations, the General Assembly adopted the "United Nations Declaration on the New Partnership for Africa's Development" (NEPAD), unanimously. The Declaration was sponsored by more than 145 of the member states of the Organisation. Among other things, the Declaration says: "We recommit ourselves to meeting the special needs of Africa as recognised in the United Nations Millennium Declaration. We affirm that international support for the implementation of the New Partnership is essential. While acknowledging the support so far expressed or provided for the New Partnership, we urge the United Nations system and the international community, in particular donor countries, to assist with the implementation of the New Partnership." Thirteen years earlier, in 1989, Africa had approached the United Nations General Assembly to urge it to support our continent by adopting another programme of action that was critical to the further advance of Africa at the time. We refer here to the Harare Declaration for the Liberation of South Africa. On that occasion, as well, the General Assembly adopted what it called the United Nations Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa, unanimously. The Harare Declaration originated from the realisation by our liberation movement and the member states of the OAU that the advances we had made as a result of our collective protracted struggle against the apartheid system had made it inevitable that the apartheid regime would seek a negotiated settlement. As we had, as a matter of principle, always favoured the peaceful resolution of all conflicts, we decided that we should prepare for these negotiations by spelling out the correct approach to this process. In this context, the Harare Declaration said: "The people of Africa, singly, collectively and acting through the OAU, are engaged in serious efforts to establish peace throughout the continent by ending all conflicts through negotiations based on the principle of justice and peace for all. We reaffirm our conviction, which history confirms, that where colonial, racial and apartheid domination exists, there can neither be peace nor justice." Because of the unwavering involvement of the peoples of Africa in the struggle for our liberation, our movement thought it correct that it should present the Harare Declaration to the OAU in the first instance. Agreement having been reached at this level, the Declaration was taken to the wider world, in particular the United Nations General Assembly, given that this wider world was itself an active and critical part of the global struggle against apartheid. At that time, on the very eve of the beginning of our formal negotiations with the apartheid regime, there were some both within and outside our movement, at home and abroad, who considered the preparations for negotiations, and therefore the elaboration of the Harare Declaration, as an act of treachery. According to this view, to talk to the enemy constituted a betrayal. Some among those who held this opinion had not understood the extent to which the struggle against apartheid, waged at home and internationally, and the changed balance of forces in our region and globally, had created the conditions for our liberation movement to win its goals through peaceful struggle. Others had fallen victim to a tendency to turn particular forms of struggle into a fetish, rather than see them as historically determined means to achieve our fundamental goals. Naturally, our opponents presented their own defeat as the defeat of our liberation movement. Among other things, they claimed that we, described as "terrorists and communists", had been defeated, because our armed struggle had failed and because the Soviet Union, led by Mikhail Gorbachev, had abandoned us. They charged that because of what they saw as our strategic reverses, we had been forced to turn our backs on our objective to ensure that the people shall govern, and had been compelled, against our will, to enter into a negotiated agreement with the people we were sworn to overthrow. In an attempt to weaken our movement during the period of the conduct of a peaceful political struggle, to improve its possibility to retain for the minority as much of the apartheid privileges as possible, and to compromise the possibility for fundamental social transformation, the apartheid regime launched a brutal campaign of state terrorism, which claimed the lives of thousands of our people. Nevertheless, neither this campaign and other manoeuvres, nor scepticism and opposition from within the ranks of the broad movement for national liberation, could block the victory scored by our liberation struggle in 1994. We owe part of that victory to the fact that, in the Harare Declaration, we asserted our right to determine our future, and enjoyed the support of the rest of the world in the exercise of that right. To prepare for its High-Level Special Session on NEPAD, earlier this year the General Assembly considered the Report of the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, on the "United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s" (UN-NADAF), adopted by the General Assembly a decade ago. In his Report, the UN Secretary General said: "Africa is at an important turning point, marked by many encouraging trends and developments. The New Partnership has emerged as the de facto policy framework for Africa and those committed to Africa's development must help make it work. The primary responsibility for implementing the New Partnership rests with Africa, its Governments and peoples. This is consistent with the principle of African ownership and leadership of the New Partnership and one of the key lessons learned from the New Agenda. The role of the United Nations system is to support the African efforts." As with the Harare Declaration, with its contribution to the liberation of the people of South Africa and the liquidation of the system of colonialism on our continent, Africa approached the world community, as represented by the UN General Assembly, to present an African development plan based on "the principle of African ownership and leadership of the New Partnership", one of the key lessons learned from the New Agenda, according to Kofi Annan. The New Partnership (NEPAD) originated from the realisation of our movement and government, as well as the other member states of the OAU, that the final liquidation of colonialism and white minority domination in Africa, created the conditions for our continent to attend to the challenge of its reconstruction and development. To achieve this, it would have to eradicate the legacy of many centuries of slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism. Nelson Mandela expressed this view at the 1994 Summit Meeting of the OAU, the first he attended as a head of state. At that meeting, held in Tunis, Tunisia, he used the symbolic imagery of the destruction of Carthage by the Roman Emperors, to communicate the message about the need and possibility for Africa's renaissance. Tunis stands where Carthage once stood. The ruins of the ancient city are part the new capital of Tunisia. Determined to destroy Africa's independence, the Roman Emperors had proclaimed - Carthage must be destroyed! Carthage was destroyed. As Africa welcomed liberated South Africa into the ranks of the Organisation of African Unity, its first President, Nelson Mandela, spoke in the neighbourhood of the ruins of Carthage, and said - Carthage must be rebuilt! Africa must be rebuilt and her independence reaffirmed. It was only possible to consider the option of a negotiated resolution of the apartheid question after the struggle against apartheid domination had created the conditions for the achievement of the strategic objective of the transfer of power to the people by means other than the armed overthrow of the apartheid regime. The Harare Declaration was a product of that struggle and an instrument for its further advance. Similarly, it was only possible to visualise the reconstruction of Carthage after this struggle had nullified the capacity of the Roman Emperors, once more to destroy Carthage. In other words, both literally and figuratively, it became possible to engage the challenge of Africa's reconstruction and development, after the struggle of the peoples of Africa had nullified the possibility of the forces for colonialism and white minority domination, and their allies, to commit aggression, to destroy and destabilise. The New Partnership for Africa's Development is a product of this victorious struggle and an instrument for its further advancement. Once again, as with the Harare Declaration, and in the aftermath of, and building on the achievement of the purposes of that Declaration, Africa combined to answer the question about its own future - what shall we do to rebuild Carthage! NEPAD, the New Partnership for Africa's Development, is the outcome of this independent African process to confront the particular challenges of our day, as the Harare Declaration was the outcome of an independent African process to confront the particular challenges of its day. Once again, there are some within the ranks of the broad movement for national liberation who do not understand that the accumulated victories of this movement globally, and the changed balance of forces in Africa and the rest of the world, have created the possibility for us to advance towards the fundamental transformation of our continent. These have not as yet understood the context within which we must continue the struggle for the total emancipation of the peoples of Africa, including our own. They have not grasped the real possibility that now exists for our continent to renew itself by extricating itself from a past of conflict and the negation of the objective of the transfer of power to the people, towards the eradication of poverty and underdevelopment, and the advance of Africa out of the periphery of global human development, to end its marginalisation. These elements, which, historically, are a component part of the African movement for national liberation, and its supporters, have fallen victim to a frozen moment in time. They have not understood that the possibility exists to rebuild Carthage. They are constricted and constrained by inertia and an inability to comprehend that nothing in the evolution of human society is permanent except change itself. Accordingly, they have made a fetish both of particular moments in the evolution of human society and the forms of struggle that the African movement for national liberation must use to achieve its fundamental objectives. Proceeding from these positions, they consider the New Partnership for Africa's Development as a betrayal of the interests of the African masses. Accordingly, they see themselves and act as opponents of NEPAD, the de facto policy framework for Africa's development, as stated by Kofi Annan. Naturally, the historic opponents of Africa's total emancipation propound the notion that ours is a "hopeless Continent". They question the ability of the peoples of Africa to end their misery as the wretched of the earth. They exploit particular problems the continent faces to present a general picture of Africa as one characterised by these particular problems, contrary to objective reality. Accordingly, they use the particular to argue against global support for the general advance of the African continent, represented by the African Union and its development programme, NEPAD. Together and in unison with the sceptics and nay-sayers within the African movement for national liberation, they scoff at and deride the vision of an African Renaissance. On the eve of the new millennium, in 2000, the peoples of the world, meeting at the UN General Assembly, expressed their resolve in the UN Millennium Declaration to "support the consolidation of democracy in Africa and assist Africans in their struggle for lasting peace, poverty eradication and sustainable development, thereby bringing Africa into the mainstream of the world economy." By adopting the "United Nations Declaration on the New Partnership for Africa's Development" earlier this week, during the Year of the 90th Anniversary of our movement, the peoples of the world reaffirmed their resolve to honour the commitment they made in the Millennium Declaration. Once more, the peoples of Africa have secured the support of the peoples of the world in their struggle to exercise their right and duty to determine their future. As with the Harare Declaration, nothing that the sceptics and our opponents do will stop the realisation of the objectives contained in NEPAD and the United Nations Declaration on the New Partnership for Africa's Development. The struggle continues. Victory is certain. Thabo Mbeki --------------------------------------------------------------------- ELECTORAL SYSTEMS Structures join debate on best system to reflect the will of the people Options for a future electoral system for South Africa are among the issues currently being debated at ANC provincial policy conferences. The conferences are taking place ahead of the ANC National Policy Conference, to be held from 27-30 September. The discussion in ANC structures on the electoral system takes place as the government-appointed Electoral Task Team (ETT), chaired by Prof Frederick Van Zyl Slabbert, prepares recommendations on a future electoral system. The task team held a conference last week to examine various principles and options with different stakeholders. In a discussion document prepared for ANC structures, the pros and cons of the main options are explored. This process is intended to empower the ANC at all levels to engage with the recommendations of the ETT and particpate in the broader public debate. The discussion document, which arises from an ANC National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting in July, argues that the current proportional representation electoral system should be retained as the option which, in the current South African context, best reflects the will of the people, encourages inclusivity and political stability, and promotes public accountability. "The current system in place affords a great degree of stability. It allows for fair representation and gives a voice to all. It has certainly allowed for a greater degree of participation of women, people with disabilities and other targeted groups than any other could. The system is also simple and familiar to voters," the document says. The statement of this view does not detract from the work of the ETT. The NEC agreed to return to this discussion once the ETT has made its proposals. The discussion document says that in evaluating different systems, five key questions need to be answered: * Does it deepen democracy and reflect the democratically expressed will of the people? * Will it contribute to nation-building and maintain political stability and peace? * Will voters feel effectively represented by the elected parliamentarians? * Will voters be able to easily understand it? * Can it be practically implemented? Three main options are considered in the document. These are the current proportional representation (PR) system, a pure constituency system, and mixed-system which combines elements of both. Proportional Representation Under the current PR system all Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Provincial Legislature (MPLs) are drawn from candidates lists selected by their parties. Each party gets a proportion of seats depending on the proportion of the vote received. This system is most democratic in that no votes are 'wasted', and it is most able to reflect the will of the people. Minority parties get fair representation and can express their needs as part of the democratic process. The current system is the most inclusive, since parties only need a quarter percent of the vote to secure a seat. This encourages political stability since it accommodates political groups who, if excluded from parliament, may choose other ways to express their aspirations. The main gripe with the PR system is that voters feel less able to hold their elected representatives accountable. However, its necessary to acknowledge that the other proposed systems would not in practice remedy the problem. The discussion document says it would be possible, and necessary, to find ways to improve accountability and communication between public representatives and voters within the PR system. Constituency System In the proposed constituency system, parties and independents nominate candidates for each of 400 constituencies. The candidate who gets the most votes in a constituency wins the seat. A drawback to this 'first-past-the-post' system is that only those who voted for the winning candidate are then represented in parliament. It is possible for candidates to be elected with much less than a majority of votes in a constituency, or for a party to hold a majority in parliament while having received less than half the votes cast. If current voting patterns continue, this system will result in the ANC occupying around 80 percent of seats in parliament, with the Democratic Party, Inkatha Freedom Party and National Party occupying the rest. Other parties are likely to have one or two seats, if at all. If this system were to be introduced, there would be about one MP for every 50,000 voters. Constituencies would be geographically vast. In a province like the Northern Cape, which constitutes about a third of South Africa's land mass, there would only be around eight MPs. The scope for voters to actually hold representatives accountable and for MPs to represent the interests of a vast and diverse population is therefore limited. Mixed System In the mixed system being proposed, some MPs come from a national PR list while some come from multi-member constituencies. This could mean, for example, that the country is divided up into 50 constituencies. In each constituency there are, say, 5 seats. Parties are then allocated the seats in a constituency in proportion to the votes they received in that constituency. A party with 60% of the votes in such a constituency would get 3 of the 5 seats. The PR lists will then be used to 'top-up' the remaining seats to ensure overall proportionality, in the same way as is currently the case with local govt elections. The mixed system gets around the problems of the constituency system by restoring the overall proportionality. It does however create two classes of public representatives, with small parties unlikely to have any constituency MPs. Parties likely to have a large number of constituency MPs, like the ANC, would then receive few PR seats and have limited scope to use its PR list to encourage representativity. While the mixed system may be an improvement on the PR system in terms of geographic accountability, these MPs would have to cover larger areas and relate to greater numbers of voters in the pure constituency system. Simplicity and practicality The PR and pure constituency system are both simple and familiar to voters because of the present systems for national and ward elections. The mixed PR and multi-member constituency system is more complicated and may hinder the full-scale participation of illiterate and marginalised voters. The PR system is the simplest to implement since only two ballots will be used in each province. The nomination system, disqualification of candidates, printing of ballot papers and results can easily be centrally coordinated. Remaining with this system will need no re-demarcation or changes to the electoral legislation or system. This will limit the preparation, training of officials and voter education that has to be done. Both the other systems would require extensive changes in law and procedures. The document notes that the preference for a PR system in no way diminishes the need for constituency-based consultation and communication. Ways need to be found for elected representatives in all spheres of government to work together to serve a constituency effectively. "Modern parliaments are mostly directed by party positions rather than individual MPs views. Therefore political parties are the main vehicles for the representation of various interests. The trend is for voters to find a home in the ideology and policies of a particular party and to vote for the party or its candidate at all levels," the document says. MORE INFORMATION: Conference Update No. 1, September 2002 http://www.anc.co.za/ancdocs/history/conf/conference51/update1.pdf --------------------------------------------------------------------- SABC Public broadcaster should be directed by public need South Africa has come a long way in transforming the broadcast media. From a public broadcaster that aggressively asserted apartheid propaganda, the SABC has, to a large extent, embraced the democratic dispensation and in its programming and news begun to reflect the ideals and values of the majority of people. But that transformation is not complete. The fundamental tenet of democracy, as well as transition and change, is that public institutions must change as society progresses and new demands emerge. This is reflected in the historical development of the SABC as a public broadcaster. Since 1994, a number of laws have been put in place recognising the need to have access to a diversity of information through a politically unbiased media. The Broadcasting Act of 1999 is one law that created a framework for the transformation of mass media. This Broadcasting Act provided as one of its objectives a broadcasting system in the country which takes into account diversity of language, culture, social experience and political perspective. It therefore required the promotion of unity in diversity by acknowledging the past and building on it. However, changes that have occurred since 1994 have not been far reaching as to transform the socio-economic and political realities of the South African Broadcaster. Despite changes made there is still no significant media diversity which represents and articulates the aspirations and interests of the biggest constituency in their own language. It is in this context that the ANC embraces the objectives of the Broadcasting Amendment Bill of 2002. Role of the public broadcaster This new Amendment Bill commits the public broadcaster to some of its fundamental responsibilities, including to inform the public. This emanates from the constitution which bestows equality on all South African and treats information reception as a basic right. As long as the majority of South Africans are not enjoying the benefits of this right their access to the democratic process remains limited. Section 32 of the Bill, which provides provision for the establishment of two regional services in the country complemented by the commercial and public services, will go a long way in assisting the national broadcaster to roll out programming in indigenous languages that are not currently adequately covered. The public broadcaster needs to find ways to communicate to the four million South Africans who are deaf or hard of hearing: through the use of sign language and closed captioning. The importance of ensuring that all languages find expression through our public broadcaster cannot be overstated. Ngugi wa Thiongo wrote: "Language is not just means of communication but a carrier of culture." The two channel systems - commercial and public - need to complement this process in ensuring that the broadcaster becomes self-sufficient and fulfills its responsibilities. However, this should happen in an environment of leveled playing fields with other broadcasters. Appropriate license conditions must apply to all. If some are required to pay a license fee for the activity of broadcasting, then all others engaged in broadcasting should be required to pay similar license fees. It is only under these conditions that our broadcasting system can be seen to be fair and transparent to all participants. A central component of any public broadcaster is to serve the interests of the majority. It differs from private broadcasting companies in that the decisions of the public entity must first and foremost consider these interests. Commercial interests are secondary. While it can be commercially viable, it is not a profit-driven vehicle. In this light, the Bill provides for the separation of the SABC into two separate units: a public broadcaster and a commercial one. Press freedom and editorial independence The Bill has been received with much trepidation. The two most contentious aspects of the Bill include the editorial charter of the SABC and language policy. The ANC reinforces strongly and in no uncertain terms the importance of press freedom and editorial integrity. We have fought a long struggle against the tyranny of the apartheid strategy to 'win hearts and minds'. We remain vigilant in creating the conditions for the people of this country themselves to evolve a unity and a culture that binds us all to South Africa. The Bill emphasises this imperative through insisting that the SABC will pursue its objectives through enjoying "freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence". In achieving this, at the same time as serving the public interest as defined in the Constitution, the SABC must develop corporate policies, including news editorial policy, local content policy and language policy, among others. Detailed policies on all aspects of the operations and services of the SABC are necessary. Under no circumstances can the public broadcaster be changed to become the mouthpiece of any political party including the ruling party. All public institutions need to shoulder the constitutional responsibility to translate the rights of South Africans into meaningful and real services. Eight years on some of the policies developed by the SABC leave much to be desired. The SABC must therefore execute its corporate responsibilities in this regard. Oversight mechanisms by democratic structures is necessary in this case to ensure fulfillment of this responsibility. Economy of the Public Broadcaster The economy of the media usually places the interest of the advertisers, and well off South Africans above the interest of other citizens. Patronage by the advertisers skews the media landscape and consequently distorts democratic process and debate. This point is accurately captured by Murdock and Golding: the underlying logic of cost operates systematically, consolidating the positions of groups already established in the main mass media markets and excluding those groups who lack the capital base for successful entry. Thus the voices that survive will largely belong to those least likely to criticize the prevailing distribution of wealth and power. Conversely, those most likely to challenge these arrangements are unable to publicise their dissent or opposition because they cannot command resources needed for effective communication to a broad audience. Public broadcasting service should be distinct in its pursuit of the objective to offer programming that educates, informs, uplifts and entertains all South Africans. Commercial considerations should not stand in the way of broadcasting establishing itself as a forum for a democratic discussion offering unrestricted access to events of national significance through an extensive coverage of our national life. Of special importance to the current national democratic order should be the showcasing of our diverse cultural heritage, diverse artistic expression and our way of life in general. Local content, reflective of popular culture, needs to be promoted together with the national symbols of our country. These are the flowers of democracy that need to flourish if a new non racial, non sexist, democratic South Africa is to be built. MORE INFORMATION: Broadcasting Amendment Bill, 2002 http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/bills/2002/b34-02.pdf --------------------------------------------------------------------- This issue of ANC Today is available from the ANC web site at: http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2002/at38.htm To receive ANC Today free of charge by e-mail each week go to: http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/subscribe.html