Bible Based Ministries

South Africa Election 2009, Microsoft Word format
South Africa Election 2009, Rich Text format

On April 22, 2009, South Africa went to the polls for the fourth time since the Communist-controlled African National Congress (ANC) came to power in 1994 – and as it has done every time, the ANC swept to victory, this time with just under 66% of the votes. And once again, no other party came even close. The Democratic Alliance (DA), the official opposition, obtained 16.66% of the national vote. The next largest party was newcomer the Congress of the People (Cope), an ANC breakaway party, with 7.42%.

Unlike the 2004 election when there was much voter apathy, there was a huge voter turnout in this election, reminiscent to some extent of the 1994 election.

The good news is that despite its overwhelming victory, the ANC’s support countrywide has fallen. In the 2004 national election it obtained 69.2% of the vote, but this time it obtained 65.9%. This means it will have 264 seats in the National Assembly, which is fewer than the 279 it won in 2004. The DA now has 67 seats, which is 17 more than it won in 2004. It may not sound like a significant loss for the ANC or a significant gain for the DA, but in South African politics, where the ANC casts a very long and sinister shadow, any reduction of its majority is a very good thing, however slight. After the victory ANC president, Jacob Zuma, boasted, “For those who do not know the ANC, you touch the ANC, you touch a lion. The ANC will never go below 60%.” Big words. Boastful words. This is, after all, the man who said the ANC will be in power until Jesus comes back.

In addition, the ANC fell a fraction short of obtaining the two-thirds majority needed to be in a position to change the country’s constitution. Although Zuma assured the country the ANC would never tamper with it, the possibility that it just might was a great fear for many South Africans. Actually, for Christians, there are many aspects of the constitution which they would love to see changed! The problem is that the ANC might also change aspects of it that should not be changed.

In the provincial elections (held simultaneously with the national one), the very bad news is that the ANC took control of eight of the nine provinces. However, a small bit of good news is that it lost support in all of them – by as much as 10% in four of them. Only in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province did it gain ground substantially. And it lost the Western Cape province entirely to the opposition DA, which became the first party to win the province outright.

But how is it possible that after fifteen years of ANC misrule, in which it has failed the people of South Africa in every single way, this former terrorist organisation could still sweep to power with such an overwhelming majority? Let us examine the reasons.

Firstly, there was intimidation before the election. It is true that this was not on the level of the intimidation before the pivotal 1994 election; but even so there most definitely was intimidation. Even KZN violence monitor Mary de Haas, who felt it was much better than in 1994, admitted, “Some people were killed”.ⁱ Well, the killing of political opponents is guaranteed to sow fear in the hearts of people, and cause them to vote, not for the party of their choice, but for the party doing the intimidating. The ANC has used intimidation of its opponents as a tactic in every single election.

Four days before the election the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) said that the 2009 elections were the worst yet for dirty tricks by the ANC. In a statement it was alleged that in some instances posters had been torn down and venues cancelled by members of the ANC. “This sets the tone for future elections and the ACDP has fears about the quality of the democracy that will be presented in the future,” said party MPL Jo-Ann Downs in a statement. She said the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), the body charged with overseeing the election, seemed powerless to intervene and the police were allegedly unwilling to co-operate. “It would appear that the ANC’s estimate of R200 million election expenditure does not include the excessive amounts of public money that have been spent on the side by government departments,” she said.ⁱⁱ

Secondly, there was corruption, fraud, vote-rigging, and even some violence and intimidation during the election itself. It was not perfectly free and fair. The IEC not surprisingly declared the election to be free and fair. But we must not be deceived. The IEC declared the 1994 election, the election which first brought the ANC to power, “free and fair” as well, even though it could be described as the most rigged election in history. ⁱⁱⁱ Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, leader of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), stated at the time of the 2004 election that ever since 1994 the ANC had been involved in vote-rigging to wrest KwaZulu-Natal province from the IFP. He mentioned the fact that uncounted ballot boxes were found in various areas after the 1994 election. “As a result we have lost many votes at each election,” he said. “Unless we ensure that there are party agents at each polling station with our DA partners, this year’s rigging is likely to be the worst ever”.^iv And there certainly was widespread vote-rigging, fraud and corruption in that election, as there had been in each of the previous ones. They were literally riddled with underhanded doings to ensure a victory for the ANC.^v Was it any different this time around? Think about it: the ANC well knew that in all likelihood it would fare worse in this election than in any previous one; so it stands to reason that it would plan to employ the dirty tactics of past elections to ensure a victory.

Here are some examples of alleged electoral fraud and corruption around the country:

*Even before the election was held, IFP leader Dr Mangosuthu Buthelezi declared that it would not be free and fair. He reiterated this claim three days before the election at an IFP rally, and said that his complaints to the Independent Electoral Commission about irregularities during previous elections had been ignored. In the presence of international election observers, Buthelezi stated that the IFP had been a victim of electoral fraud since 1994. “Documents detailing irregularities and corruption during elections were sent to IEC chairperson Dr Brigalia Bam [who] has not responded. She promised to respond but she has not,” he said.^vi Buthelezi also said that he had been made aware of fake ballot papers being printed in Pietermaritzburg, and that this had been going on for a while. It was alleged that these ballot papers were being kept at a farm, and were being distributed to various voting stations. Buthelezi reported the matter to the police, who referred the matter to the IEC’s main operations centre in Pretoria. The Zulu-language Ilanga newspaper reported that its sources alleged that a high-ranking government official was behind the printing of the fake ballot papers.^vii

Certainly the IFP did very badly in this year’s election. Back in 1994 it won the entire province and enjoyed massive support; but in each election since then its support has been falling, and in this election its support was almost halved since 2004. It lost almost 400 000 votes at the national level, and almost the same number at the KZN provincial level.

*Buthelezi also alleged that KZN premier, Sibusiso Ndebele, had been stuffing false ballot papers into ballot boxes in order to rig the elections. Buthelezi reported this to KZN Police Commissioner Hamilton Ngidi for investigation. Naturally, the ANC and its alliance partners, the SA Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions, strongly denied the allegations.^viii

*In the Durban Metro area it emerged that 1.876 million votes had been cast, despite the fact that only 1.639 million people were registered to vote there! The IFP called on the IEC to urgently investigate the results.^ix But thereafter the country heard no more about it.

*There were many problems countrywide relating to ballot boxes, ballot papers and other logistical issues. Helen Zille, leader of the DA, said that the IEC had run out of ballot papers and boxes at polling stations that were mostly DA strongholds, with hundreds of people being turned away from voting stations as a result.^x Zille lambasted the IEC for running a chaotic election, and hinted that conditions would favour the ANC. “I think the turnout was great, but the IEC was pathetic. They ran out of ballot papers, they ran out of ballot boxes,” she said.^xi This kind of “orchestrated chaos” was very widespread in the 1994 election that brought the ANC to power for the first time, and there is no reason to doubt the truth of Zille’s remarks.

*In Pietermaritzburg, voters and parties raised questions about the competence of some electoral staff. The DA’s Mark Steele said shortages of papers and boxes could have been easily sorted out if presiding officers had ordered more material from the local electoral warehouse early enough.^xii The competence of electoral staff would not have only been a problem in one city.

*Three days after the election, on the 25th, abandoned ballot boxes filled with marked papers (most of them in favour of the Democratic Alliance!) were found in Gauteng province, according to a news report on national TV channel eTV. Of course, the IEC immediately said that the voting was not compromised despite these finds! The issue here is: these were the ones which were found, but how many were not found? In remote rural areas, it would be a comparatively easy matter to ditch or even destroy ballot boxes, for example by taking them into the bush and burning them. Did it happen? We will never know, but the fact that such abandoned ballots were found would indicate that there were others which were never found.

*There were alleged infringements of electoral rules relating to the ban on political canvassing around the polling stations, and unauthorised party supporters entering the voting area. There were also allegations of insulting and intimidatory behaviour at the entrances to some voting stations. This was, according to KZN violence monitor Mary de Haas, “common.”^xiii Well, if such behaviour was common in this hotly-contested province, how could the elections possibly have been free and fair?

*In the northern suburbs of Pietermaritzburg, at many polling stations, the ANC had their stands right outside, despite the fact that electoral regulations stipulated that they had to be 100 metres away.^xiv

*In QwaQwa, in the Free State province, an electoral officer was shot and wounded while opening a voter station.^xv

*Police had to intervene when ANC and IFP supporters clashed at a polling station in Msinga, KZN.^xvi

Thus a certain amount of electoral fraud, corruption, vote-rigging, violence and intimidation was reported. It is of course very true that it was nothing like what it had been in the 1994 election. However, the ANC is far more sophisticated today than it was fifteen years ago. They are masters at cover-ups and distortions of the truth. There is no reason to believe, given their past history of massive electoral fraud and corruption, that in this election they always played by the rules. Only a comparatively small number of “irregularities” were reported this time, but how much went unreported? How much was not even noticed? There were election monitors from various Third World, corrupt, dictatorial African countries. It is not at all surprising, then, that very little fraud and corruption was reported! These monitors came from countries whose governments are in league with the ANC. Some of them, in fact, had a vested interest in seeing to it that the ANC was returned to power. And virtually none of them have any kind of track record of good government and “democratic principles” themselves! It is quite obvious, then, that with election monitors such as these “observing” the elections, widespread fraud and corruption could have occurred, and the South African population, and the world at large, would be none the wiser.

It must also be acknowledged that the IFP was allegedly involved in at least some illegal activities too, in KwaZulu-Natal. For example:

*IFP members were alleged to have been toyi-toying (dancing) in the polling station at Macambini, thereby intimidating voters. And at Ehlabeni polling station near Creighton, an IFP supporter was alleged to have assaulted people and damaged property.^xvii

*In Ulundi, a presiding electoral officer was arrested for electoral fraud. She allegedly stuffed a ballot box with papers marked in favour of the IFP. The IFP, however, said the arrested person was a member of the ANC. “The IFP is distancing itself from the suspected fraud,” said its national chairwoman. “We suspect that there was conniving between the IEC and the ANC…. This was done deliberately to discredit the name of the IFP. It would be naive of the IFP to commit such a thing.”^xviii

*In Estcourt, an alleged shootout occurred between ANC and IFP supporters, during which a police officer and IFP councillor were injured.^xix In Wembezi near Estcourt, armed police and military police intervened to defuse tensions between ANC and IFP supporters, when IFP supporters tore down ANC flags and blocked entry to voting stations.

Thus the IFP was certainly allegedly involved in incidents of violence, fraud, etc. And there may also have been times when other parties, as well, were using dirty tricks. But what I wrote in my book, “Holy War” Against South Africa, about the 1994 election, has been true of all the subsequent elections: “There certainly could have been IFP supporters who also managed to do some of these illegal things. By no means is the present author attempting to convey the impression that the IFP was a perfectly virtuous party. But when one considers the massive bias of the IEC in favour of the ANC, not to mention the massive support for the ANC from foreign observers, as well as the facts of the ANC’s sordid history, it is quite clear that such IFP irregularities as there may have been were far, far less than the widespread, massive ANC irregularities countrywide.”^xx This time around, unlike in 1994, there may not (for all we know) have been widespread, massive ANC irregularities; but can there be any doubt that there were at least some, and in all likelihood many?

But even if the election had been utterly free and fair, the ANC would still have won. Not with such a huge majority, certainly; but their victory was a foregone conclusion. Let us move on, then, to the other reasons for the overwhelming ANC victory, yet again:

Thirdly, there were just too many new, ultra-small opposition parties in this election. These pulled many opposition voters away from the bigger and more effective opposition parties.

Fourthly, what could be called the Jacob Zuma factor: the ANC president was riding a wave of immense popularity among the black masses. Even in KwaZulu-Natal, huge numbers of traditionally IFP voters actually voted for the ANC this time, simply because Zuma is a Zulu and they wanted a Zulu for president. Zuma is the first non-Xhosa and Zulu leader of the ANC since 1967, and millions of Zulus, the largest black nation in South Africa, wanted a Zulu for president of the country. The ANC proclaimed that Zuma would be the first Zulu to rule South Africa since King Shaka. Of course, this isn’t historically correct, as Shaka never ruled over the entire country, although his kingdom was vast; but it makes for good electioneering and that’s what the ANC wanted. The Zulu vote in KwaZulu-Natal, in fact, carried the day for Jacob Zuma. The increase of support for the ANC in KZN contributed nearly a fifth to its national support – two million votes.^xxi Without it the ANC would have done far worse in this election. This is shown by the fact that it lost support almost everywhere else, whereas in KwaZulu-Natal it gained. The increase in ANC votes in KZN made up for its losses elsewhere in the country.

Fifthly, huge numbers of young, first-time voters, mostly black, came out and voted in this election – and most of them voted for the ANC. Not because they voted with their heads (at their age the majority do not even properly understand the issues), but because (like their parents) they view the ANC as the “liberation party”.

For here is the sixth, and most important, reason for the ANC victory: the vast majority of blacks still voted for it for only one major reason: out of gratitude because it is perceived as the “liberation party” – the organisation that waged a terrorist revolution against the white government of the past, and finally took control of the country. There is still immense emotional support for the organisation perceived to be the “liberation party”. This is the principal answer for those who are flabbergasted at the ANC’s overwhelming victory – yet again – despite the internal divisions and split which led to the formation of a new party (Cope), despite the corruption charges that dogged Jacob Zuma throughout the campaign, and despite the dismal failure of the ANC to clamp down on the rampant crime rate, or to deliver on its previous promises.

This is a phenomenon common to African states, but very difficult for people in other parts of the world to fully grasp. In most of the world, no matter how popular a political party may be when it comes to power, some years down the line it sheds much of its popular support. This is because, sinful human nature being what it is, almost no party ever truly succeeds in fulfilling the aspirations of the populace. In subsequent elections, very often, the percentage of those voting for that party drops, and continues to drop, as the electorate realise that the party they voted for is simply not living up to their expectations.

But in Africa, the revolutionary organisation that sweeps to power after an armed revolution against the hated colonial power (or, in SA’s case, the hated so-called “apartheid government”), is able to capitalise on that, and ride the wave of popular support for many years, even for decades. It doesn’t matter how badly they then govern, all that matters to “the people” is that they were the ones who “liberated” them. A largely unsophisticated, often illiterate or semi-literate populace is unable to see that they were deceived: it is not liberation at all, but rather a form of slavery to their Marxist rulers that has been imposed on them. And so they continue to support them, by and large, even though their rulers now use and abuse them on a far greater scale than the previous government ever did. And in SA, this kind of fawning gratitude reaches even greater heights, because of the almost godlike status conferred upon one man: Nelson Mandela, the world’s most popular politician. The ANC is Nelson Mandela in the eyes of millions of South Africans, and such is his mystique and standing in the country and the world, that as long as he is alive, the ANC will be forgiven almost anything. And even after he is gone, the ANC will continue to milk the Mandela myth for all it is worth.

For indeed it is a myth. Mandela does not deserve any of the praise and sycophantic adoration heaped upon him. This man headed a terrorist organisation. The scales are beginning to fall off at least the eyes of some in the wider world, to a certain extent at least. But the “Mandela myth” has been built up over many decades, and it shows no signs of fading; nor will it, not for many decades more.

But to return to my point. In SA, as in the rest of Africa, the ruling “liberation party” enjoys massive support, simply because it is perceived as the “liberator.” In the Sydney-based newspaper, The Australian, the editorial of April 13, 2004, said: “For the good of South Africa, this [2004] must be the last election where people vote for the ANC as much out of gratitude for its past achievements as out of trust that it will deliver on its promises for the future.” Certainly very true; but sadly, a warning not heeded by the masses. Duncan du Bois, a columnist in The Witness, a South African daily, wrote: “The history of post-liberation Africa shows that political liberators can trade on ‘gratitude for past achievements’ for decades, even when they have impoverished a country to the point of starvation, as in the case of Zimbabwe…. The ANC, arguably, could look forward to at least another two elections as the beneficiaries of the gratitude vote…. These are the hardcore realities of the South African political scene that are fuelling the growth of political arrogance in the ruling party”.^xxii

And so here we are: the people of this country are now to be subjected to another five years of ANC/Communist Party misrule.

Despite Jacob Zuma’s shady past; despite the internal squabbling and deep divisions within the party; despite the ANC’s utter failure, even its utter lack of will, to bring the crime holocaust under control; despite over 350 000 people having been murdered in SA since the ANC came to power in 1994, over 750 000 women and children raped since it came to power, and over 800 000 babies murdered in their mothers’ wombs since the ANC legalised abortion on demand on the 1st February 1997; despite the ongoing disarming of the general population; despite its refusal to even reconsider bringing back the death penalty; despite the ANC-orchestrated collapse of the education and health care systems; despite its vastly increased taxes and yet stupendously dismal service delivery; despite the ANC’s record of corruption and despite millions of job losses under this government^xxiii – millions and millions of black people still voted for it. These millions of black people have to first become thoroughly disillusioned with the ANC, before they will turn against it and vote intellectually, and not emotionally. But this will take years; probably decades. The African National Congress is still viewed, by multiplied millions in this country, as the “liberation party”, that “freed” the “oppressed blacks” from the white man. Only when those millions realise that their real oppression only began when a Marxist government came to power, will they finally begin to turn against this monstrous organisation. Until then, despite the fact that South Africa has descended into Socialist chaos and corruption already, the ANC will continue to enjoy huge popular support. Millions today are suffering as a result of the poverty, the crime, and the general collapse of all sectors of society; but it is still too early. Their suffering will have to increase even more, before the scales finally fall from their eyes. It will happen. Of that we can be certain. But not now. Not tomorrow. Not by the time of the next election. Nor the one after that. But one day.

We call upon the Lord’s people everywhere to pray for Christians in South Africa!

May 2009

Shaun Willcock is a minister of the Gospel and lives in South Africa. He runs Bible Based Ministries. For other news articles (which may be downloaded and printed), as well as details about his books, audio messages, pamphlets, etc., please visit the Bible Based Ministries website; or write to the address below. If you would like to be on Bible Based Ministries’ electronic mailing list, to receive all future articles, please send your details.

Bible Based Ministries

info@biblebasedministries.co.uk

www.biblebasedministries.co.uk

This article may be copied for free distribution if it is copied in full

Contending for the Faith Ministries

(Distributor for Bible Based Ministries)

42055 Crestland Drive

Lancaster, CA 93536

USA

ENDNOTES:

Filed under: south africa