Erosion of public trust in leaders set to undermine 2009 elections in South Africa
* COLLETTE SCHULZ-HERZENBERG | Wednesday August 6, 2008 00:00
Without clear commitments by the new ANC leadership towards ethical conduct in public office, levels of trust in politicians are likely to decrease, further alienating voters.
Modern democracies gain much of their legitimacy by holding political leaders and public officials accountable. When corruption or conflicts of interest arise, public officials are discredited and levels of trust in democratic institutions decline. Ongoing scandals and allegations in the media appear to have taken their toll. In 2006 the national public opinion survey Afrobarometer found that 68% of respondents believe that some, or all, of officials in the Office of the Presidency are corrupt, while 70% thought that to be the case with the members of National Parliament. Unelected government officials did not fair better - 82% of respondents thought them likely to be corrupt. When asked how well or badly government is handling the fight against corruption in government, the majority (52%) felt that it was doing badly, 45% said well, while the rest were unsure.
South African voter studies show that trust and confidence in political institutions play an increasingly important role among voters as they decide whether to support the incumbents at the next election or not. Under normal circumstances voters can lodge their protest or disapproval with government's performance by moving their support from one party to another at elections, sending a strong message of dissatisfaction to incumbents. Yet South Africa's opposition parties have, so far, failed to broaden their appeal among voters. With a lack of an alternative political home for many, inter-party shifts are largely absent.
These conditions can spell disaster for electoral politics. As the erosion of trust in politicians increases so do levels of political stagnation among voters.South African turnout data shows that between 1994 and 2004 an increasing amount of people declined to cast their ballots for any party whatsoever. Rather than dissatisfied voters moving their support, participation at elections has simply declined.
Electoral stagnation is likely to have negative effects on the quality of South Africa's democracy. Increased voter stay-aways de-energize the political system. With many voters unwilling to change their party allegiance, elections are unlikely to act as a meaningful vehicle to hold public officials to account. This simply means that the ANC will continue to win elections, possibly with higher percentages of the vote share. Yet, the party's electoral margins will be based on a decreasing proportion of support from the overall voter population. An election mandate from a smaller percentage of eligible voters indicates that fewer citizens are willing to cast legitimacy over the regime. The governing party's credibility is likely to be reduced as its pool of support shrinks.
Of even greater concern is the fear that dissatisfied voters 'buy out' of democracy. When elections fail to serve as a safety valve, without an outlet, public dissatisfaction may accumulate as people begin to question the value of democracy. Citizens can become dissatisfied with the political system, and democracy itself, if they feel there is little chance of exercising accountability over elected leaders. The consequences for the political system may be even more serious if, indeed, citizens do reject democratization as the best form of government.
Moreover, when parties cease to fear the ballot box they are less likely to respond to public opinion. The value of elections as a means to discipline elite behaviour is eroded. A dominant party like the ANCcan take the citizenry's vote for granted because it is not seriously threatened at the polls. History shows how an extended period in power can engender complacency, arrogance and even corruption in the dominant party. Political uncertainty is good for democracy because it keeps politicians alert and makes them responsive to the citizenry.
Since elections are unlikely to act as a meaningful vehicle to control the behaviour of public officials, the response of the new ANC leadership becomes crucial to addressing citizens' concerns.Given the mounting evidence of an increasingly alienated electorate one might expect the leadership that emerged after the ANC-conference at Polokwane in December 2007 to be vigorously communicating its commitment to the politics of principles. Certainly, it appeared that a key motivation for leadership change seen at Polokwane was a greater need for accountable leadership. Yet leaders are largely silent on the erosion of democratic values. Lone appeals by former cabinet minister Kader Asmal to party members to show integrity and respect for constitutional democracy are dwarfed by a leadership set on securing their futures at great cost to public confidence. Rather than revitalize the integrity of public office, leaders are locked into a battle for political survival. It seems as if the ethical discourse of past-distinguished leaders has been overshadowed lately by rhetoric that challenges constitutionalism. In the Sunday Times recently, Archbishop Desmond Tutu lamented how it so quickly happens that integrity is now deemed irrelevant for public office.
Unethical behaviour by public officials is a concern because it indicates that the democratic values that underpin the constitution are not internalised nor taken seriously. More worrying however is the lack of an institutional response by democracy's watchdog organisations towards unconstitutional behaviour. Parliament as an institution has been unable to assert its independence over executive pressure when confronted with the conflicts of interest presented by the Arms Deal. More recently, the reaction of the Human Rights Commission towards ANC Youth League President Julius Malema's unconstitutional behaviour, although initially robust, quickly faltered into submission. Faulty leadership can be a feature in any democracy - the critical measure is whether its institutions are sufficiently strong to defend its basic principles. Leaders are transient in that they come and go but institutions are permanent. As institutions are forced to bow to political pressure their challenge is to demonstrate a robustness and longevity that transcends the immediacy of party politics.
When a new set of leaders take the reins of power after the next election, will they allow our institutions to do the job of scrutinizing public officials? A paradox lies within the new leadership, many of whom form part of ANC President Jacob Zuma's core constituency. Close association with a key figure at the centre of power, whose credibility is questioned as he faces trial on corruption charges, threatens one's ability to clean up public life. It is a matter of avoiding political suicide while cleaning up the very system that ensures your livelihood. Holding to account those who benefit from public office requires a show of wisdom and will that must transcend the current turmoil of party politics. Since elections are unlikely to act as a meaningful vehicle for control of public officials, the greatest challenge for the ANC leadership during the next decade will be enforcing ethical behaviour from public officials and defending democratic institutions designed to check and monitor future generations of leaders. (Institute of Security Studies)
*Collette Schulz-Herzenberg, Senior Researcher, Corruption and Governance Programme , ISS Cape Town