2005-11-22,+Play+the+facts,+not+the+man+-+letter+in+MandG

= Play the facts, not the man =

I was astounded by the anti-democratic stand taken against Jacob Zuma in your editorial “Be afraid, be very afraid” (October 14).

Your assertion that Zuma’s actions offer a clear snapshot of what his presidency would be like is totally misplaced. He is on the back foot in a case that the National Prosecuting Authority strangely wants to postpone after almost five years of investigations. His behaviour should be judged in a context of one who is defending himself against accusations, and not that of the presidency.

You refer to Zuma as a populist prepared to pander to the basest instincts of ordinary people. What exactly is populism? Without it and the efforts of the ordinary people, the African National Congress would not have been unbanned and Nelson Mandela would still be in jail. Without it, the ANC government would not be in power.

It is not the intellectuals at the Mail & Guardian who put the ANC and Thabo Mbeki into power, but the ordinary people. Didn’t President Mbeki descend from his ivory tower to pander to the “basest instincts of ordinary people” to get himself re-elected for a second term? Didn’t the ANC use populism to win elections by promising “a better life for all”? “Populism” is a loose term whose meaning is unclear and which can be abused to advance certain arguments. If you have a case against Zuma, argue it factually without resorting to wanton generalisations.

You complain that Zuma has never given his version of the R500 000 bribe message, although he has only to call a press conference to provide it. Perhaps -- but what if doing so would compromise his impending case? What if his attorneys advised him against doing this?

And why only Zuma? Why are you not using your investigative journalistic skills to follow up the other two encrypted faxes of a similar nature that “implicate” another high-ranking politician? I’m referring to the ones raised by the Democratic Alliance in Parliament.

You also hint that Zuma needs to be prevented from becoming a president. I am disappointed that the M&G, like whites under apartheid, seems to be afraid of democracy. The decision on who becomes president lies with the electorate. If voters catapult Zuma to the presidency, everyone who respects democracy - including the M&G - should bow to the wishes of the people. And since when have you been in the business of canvassing support for or against potential presidential candidates?

Another thing - Zuma has every right to express his feelings in an open forum. A dangerous pattern is emerging in South Africa whereby certain pronouncements are regarded as taboo and should not be aired.

The M&G has every right to disagree with Zuma, but should do so by playing the facts and not the man. Comments like “If installed as president, it would be reasonable to conclude that Zuma would continue operating in the same way” are premature, reckless, devoid of fact and speculative.

This case is still far too much in its infancy to conclude what a Zuma presidency would be like. We do not even know what revelations - either against or in favour of Zuma - will come out of the trial.

Until then, it would be prudent for the M&G to keep its daggers in the closet, and in the process retain the credibility it has painstakingly established over the years.

-- Mitchell