President Cyril Ramaphosa. Picture: REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko
President Cyril Ramaphosa. Picture: REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

I share Joel Netshitenzhe’s sentiments with regard to the public protector’s investigation of the CR17 campaign funding, but would place the emphasis on cadre integrity and accountability, irrespective of who funded who during the Nasrec conference (“Public protector’s blunder a plus for electoral politics”, August 15).

My problem is that even if we can come up with the best mechanisms to regulate internal ANC campaign funding, it will still not guarantee that state capture will not happen again. What will stop state capture is if cadres in the ANC are held to account and perform their duties with integrity.

I find it offensive that because former president Jacob Zuma failed to manage his personal relationship with the Gupta family, President Cyril Ramaphosa must be held to a presumptuous test. The challenge with this test as espoused by the public protector is it equates the funding of the CR17 campaign to state capture. This flawed test assumes that Zuma’s questionable integrity, and that of the EFF leaders, is the same as Ramaphosa’s, yet the difference is that Zuma and his latest buddies refuse to be accountable for their actions.

When Zuma and the EFF are called to account by the judiciary or public protector they resort to tactics that undermine these institutions, whereas Ramaphosa immediately co-operated when he was required to account.

My advice to the EFF and the “rogue unit” reporters is that whoever was responsible for state capture must account for their actions first, and then all others can follow. Otherwise corruption will always go unpunished.          

Lazola Vabaza
Via e-mail


Sunday Times Politics Weekly | CR17: Did Ramaphosa buy his position in the ANC?

For more episodes, click here.

Subscribe: iono.fm | Spotify | Apple Podcast | Pocket Casts | Player.fm