Lesego Mahlangu
The democratic dispensation has largely postured a tolerance of all political views – through debate and a media fraternity that enjoys the freedom to entertain the freedom of speech and expression, regardless of who it may criticise or oppose.
Nonetheless, a study by Quote This Woman+ (a South African NGO) has revealed that in this country, fewer than 20% of sources quoted in the news and public engagements are women. The media and public engagement can loosely be understood as news commentary, public opinion publications, public debate and general news coverage.
The irony of these findings is that despite the domination of women (in numbers) across most sectors, particularly in politics, women are hardly at the centre of leading the narratives that are shaping spaces and leading influence. Are women simply not interested in engagements? And if they are, who is listening and engaging with the tolerance well reserved across all political spectrums?
When Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu wrote an opinion article titled “Hi Mzansi, have you seen justice?”, she delved into a popular debate regarding the inclusivity of the Constitution. She pondered the accessibility of the Constitution by the ordinary South African, and its capability to advance the aspirations of radical economic transformation as a policy adoption of the ANC.
The minister barely made new observations and criticism of the judiciary, as others have including former president Jacob Zuma, EFF leader Julius Malema, former minister Trevor Manuel and many politicians who are well within their rights to advance political discourse. She acted as a politician and typically mirrored the character of South African politics.
The substantiating opinion article was not met with the usual debating sophistication that comes with tolerant responsive dialogue and discourse that is often afforded to men and facilitated across media platforms and practitioners.
She was met with labels, dismissive criticism of her character, accusations of being a power monger, and plagiarism.
Influential media figures such as Redi Tlhabi unusually did not give the minister’s views any airtime, and dismissed her with a referral to psychological evaluation for whatever reasons observed by her, towards a woman with an opinion. Other media practitioners dismissed Minister Sisulu on the basis that, due to obligations to her office as well as social standing – she had no right to make criticism and observations about an inclusive society.
Despite having given airtime to many other politicians who equally sensationalised the plight of black people for the advancement of their political capital, the hypocritical Tlhabi called out Minister Sisulu without calling out other politicians.
The tolerance of fellow politicians and statesmen was hardly reserved for Minister Sisulu. Unusually, there was a media briefing by Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, who was acting in the position at the time, and criticism within the ANC of her ambition to lead.
Among the critiques, it is disappointing that Minister Sisulu was hardly criticised on the merits of the matter that she had put forward.
The chief justice hardly considered that the opinion of Minister Sisulu is validated by the work she had committed herself to from the dawn of this democracy.
To simply leave her observation as “attacks” on the Constitution, is a disregard to the concerns raised not only by Minister Sisulu, but also ordinary South Africans who felt alienated by the judiciary as an organ of state.
Chief Justice Zondo neglected the illustration of the “house negro” analogy to portray the alliance of the so-called “black middle-class” and professionals to systematic and institutionalised racism that often gaslights ordinary black South Africans who have, indeed, hardly seen justice.
He relegated the observation to “insult”, rather than an opportunity to advance a discussion on the role of judges and legal practitioners towards a transformation agenda.
The less said about “veteran” Mavuso Msimang, the better.
The man has hardly enabled a policy discourse within the ANC, and is constantly being engaging in character assassination of anyone who opposes President Cyril Ramaphosa’s agenda in the ANC.
It is, however, in true character for the ANC to be dismissive of strong women among its ranks.
Minister Sisulu is a typical victim of gender-based political violence that has relegated the participation of women to mere numbers, quotas and policy fronts.
The observation by Minister Sisulu suggesting that the Constitution has played a role in advancing the persistence of white monopoly capital, should be qualified by the persistence of patriarchy within political spaces, explicit in the sexist attitudes reserved for women due to white-supremacist patriarchy co-opting black elites, particularly black men, for the perseverance of capitalism.
Pretoria News