The country’s parliament announced, on the day that the Budget Speech was expected to be delivered, that it would be postponed until a later date, reportedly over concerns within the GNU about a proposed 2% increase in VAT, among others.



For the first time in its democratic history, South Africa has postponed its 2025 Budget Speech to March 12, after it was initially expected to be delivered on February 19.



This was after reports of an emergency cabinet meeting, called by President Cyril Ramaphosa, earlier on Wednesday following concerns by members of the executive committee, which included a proposed 2% increase in Value Added Tax (VAT). It would have taken the country’s VAT to 17% from the current 15%.



National Assembly speaker, Thoko Didiza announced to parliament that an agreement could not be reached regarding these proposals. &nbsp;



“Cabinet decided not to come and do a presentation of the budget and allow themselves enough time to relook at the budget and come back to this house in March, at a time at which they will inform us,” she said.



Finance Minister, Enoch Godongwana later briefed the media on the postponement announcement, where the new date was announced.



“Cabinet is united in the view that the budget must strike a balance between the interest of the public, economic growth and fiscal sustainability,” he said.



Political party leaders in the country have each offered their view with the Economic Freedom Fighters’ Julius Malema stating that “this is unprecedented”.



“This is not a practice we want to set for this parliament. It is going to be your legacy that, during your tenure, that parliament could not debate and adopt a budget. You are denying this body an opportunity to receive a budget, debate it, accept it or reject it,” Malema added in parliament.



The Democratic Alliance&#8217;s (DA) John Steenhuisen later said, “There were some concerns around some of the proposals in the current budget that members of the GNU felt were not in-line with the growth agenda in South Africa”.



“What we want to do is come back with a budget that will give South Africans hope that there is now a big move forward under the Government of National Unity to fix the economy, create jobs and ensure that we can combat the high cost of living.”

President Cyril Ramaphosa Launches South Africa’s G20 Presidency

South Africa’s 2025 Budget Postponed Until March 12

With the country’s democratic voting process set to take place later this week, FORBES AFRICA speaks to several analysts about the mindset of the citizens and what may unfold in the coming days.



As South Africa prepares to head to the polls on May 29, social media has been abuzz with rhetoric and political memes in equal measure. But despite the light-hearted approach to the challenges they face, South Africans know that the decisions made later this week are no laughing matter.



A MarkData poll released by eNCA on May 20, showed that the ruling party is likely to receive 43.4% of the national vote. The figure is slightly higher than that of the Ipsos opinion poll from April that had the ANC attaining 40.2%.



“This is the party which liberated the country, which ended apartheid. This is the party which gave many voters their first house, electrification, running water, the opportunity of freedom. And I think that still lingers for many voters, certainly older voters,” says election analyst, Wayne Sussman, who was involved in the MarkData study.



The past few years have seen the unemployment rate soar, with it standing at 32.9% in the first quarter of 2024, numerous allegations of corruption and obstruction of justice, and 332 days&nbsp;of load shedding in 2023 alone. Yet, the ANC still has a significant element going for them, according to political analyst Asanda Ngoasheng.



“The ANC continues to have the widest range of policies that cover the widest range of South Africans. They have a lot of diverse representation within them.”



Despite the governing party appealing to the broadest sphere of the population, many voters remain undecided as to where to cast their ballot.



“To a large extent, people do not feel close to political parties in the same way as they once did,” explains Collette Schulz-Herzenberg, an associate professor in the department of political science at the Stellenbosch University.



“Party identification has declined across the electorates. There&#8217;s just less people with a party identification. And we know from global studies that party identifiers are more likely to vote because they are motivated to do so.”



“The ANC has hurt the South African electorate so much that they mistrust it,” notes Ngoasheng.



“People don&#8217;t believe the government when it says loadshedding is over or when it says they&#8217;ve solved XYZ. We almost live in a situation of permanently waiting for the other shoe to drop. Even when there is potentially good news, people kind of wait for like, well, what&#8217;s the negative that&#8217;s going to come out of it?”



“What we&#8217;ve seen is that people tend to leave the ANC because they just feel dissatisfied with the performance of the party in government, but they don&#8217;t necessarily switch their vote to an opposition party,” explains Schulz-Herzenberg.



Despite past trends, those contesting the elections — especially first-time candidates — will be hoping the discontent motivates voters to try something new.



“There are 52 parties in the ballot. We’re in a very fragmented environment, and there&#8217;s a scenario that the five biggest parties in Parliament will all go backwards in this election,” Sussman says.



A showdown is expected in KwaZulu-Natal where former President Jacob Zuma is likely to take away votes from both the ANC and EFF with the Umkhonto weSizwe (MK) party.



“MK will be the big story in this election, even if they don&#8217;t reach their potential,” says Sussman. Based on the previously-mentioned MarkData predictions, the party will achieve 46.4% of the provincial vote.



It also remains to be seen whether the DA maintains its national position as the official opposition, or whether a loss of support will pivot the EFF to that spot.



“Rise Mzansi seem to be capturing quite a lot of the middle class vote across the racial line, which is interesting to observe considering that most Africans vote along racial lines,” says Ngoasheng.

South African Election Campaign Posters

A Look Ahead As South Africans Prepare For 2024 Elections

South Africa&#8217;s National Assembly has voted in favor of suspending diplomatic relations with Israel, including closing its embassy, in response to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This significant political move reflects escalating tensions and calls for a ceasefire and peace negotiations.



South Africa’s National Assembly voted yesterday to suspend diplomatic ties with Israel, as well as the closure of the Israeli embassy within the country, due to Israel’s continued war against Hamas in Palestine. The vote, which came hours after Israel recalled its ambassador to South Africa, passed with 248 votes in favor and 91 against. However, the vote is not binding unless enforced by President Cyril Ramaphosa.



The vote, initiated by opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and supported by the ruling African National Congress (ANC), called for a suspension of all diplomatic ties with Israel until a ceasefire is reached. Earlier this week during a virtual summit of the BRICS nations, chaired by President Ramaphosa, it issued a statement condemning attacks on civilians in Palestine.



The move was welcomed by the South African branch of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. “There is no role for diplomacy with a settler-colonial apartheid state that is guilty of genocide against a population that it occupies,” said SA BDS Coordinator Roshan Dadoo to FORBES AFRICA. “South Africa should not be having relations with a state that perpetrates war crimes with impunity, and treats the United Nations, international law, and the rest of the world with utter disdain.”



However, the National Assembly’s vote was not appreciated by all parties. The South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) condemned the vote as pointless in light of Israel’s withdrawal of its ambassador for consultations, and condemned the chanting of “from the river to the sea” by some members of parliament “a chant which calls for the destruction of the only Jewish state, makes a mockery of the ANC’s stated position of supporting a two-state solution,” said Professor Karen Milner of the SAJBD in a statement.



Both the Israeli ambassadors’ recall as well as the National Assembly vote indicate a further breakdown in diplomatic relations between Israel and South Africa, which has historically had strong political, historical, and ideological ties to Palestinians. The ANC-led government has long condemned the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, and it remains to be seen how this recent development will impact the already strained relations.



The resolution, titled ‘Closure of the Israel Embassy in South Africa and suspension of all diplomatic relations with Israel’, was presented by Julius Malema of the EFF. This parliamentary decision, while symbolic, reflects a long-standing stance of the South African government since Nelson Mandela&#8217;s presidency, likening the Palestinian struggle to the country’s own fight against apartheid. The ANC&#8217;s chief whip, Pemmy Majodina, emphasized the resolution&#8217;s call for a ceasefire and commitment to United Nations-facilitated peace negotiations.



President Ramaphosa has been vocally critical of Israel&#8217;s military actions in Gaza, urging the International Criminal Court to investigate potential war crimes.



This recent parliamentary vote, amidst the backdrop of escalating violence in Gaza and Israel&#8217;s strategic military campaign against Hamas, marks a pivotal moment in South Africa&#8217;s foreign policy, mirroring its historical commitment to human rights and international law. As the world watches, the actions of Ramaphosa&#8217;s administration in the coming days will be crucial in shaping the future of South Africa-Israel relations and, possibly, the broader geopolitical landscape in the Middle East.

Israeli attacks continue on the 47th day in Gaza

South Africa Votes to Suspend Diplomatic Ties with Israel Amid Gaza Conflict

On February 28, Sandton, known as Africa’s richest square mile, witnessed a wave of red berets and angry faces, as members of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) took to the leafy streets lined with commercial buildings, to protest the power cuts crippling South Africa. The country has seen a spate of load-shedding in recent months due to the Eskom crisis. In this image, an EFF member lapses into a serene moment, looking up helplessly, amidst all the singing and chanting at Innesfree Park where the masses had gathered ahead of a march to the state power utility’s head offices in Sunninghill, singing struggle songs and disrupting traffic.



Image by Motlabana Monnakgotla

EFF 832

Painting The Town Red

It has been argued by many that the 2019 general election is going to be a watershed election. In other words, it is going to be the most competitive election since the advent of democracy in 1994. 



While this assumption may have been closer to reality before the resignation of Jacob Zuma as president of the Republic of South Africa in February 2018, I would not be surprised if the performance of the African National Congress (ANC) defied these expectations. 



For me, the irony is that it is Cyril Ramaphosa, one of the weakest leaders in the history of the ANC, who may pull the ruling party away from the electoral calamity Zuma’s ignominious presidency would have inflicted on the ANC, had it survived beyond 2018. 



A further irony lies in the fact that Ramaphosa is not only a lame-duck ANC leader who cannot govern without the consent of his opponents in the ruling party, but is also the head of a ‘new dawn’ project that has, to a large degree, become the ‘new yawn.’ 



READ MORE | <a href="https://www.forbesafrica.com/opinion/2019/04/27/over-the-rainbow-25-years-of-freedom-for-south-africa/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label="Over The Rainbow: 25 Years Of Freedom For South Africa (opens in a new tab)">Over The Rainbow: 25 Years Of Freedom For South Africa</a>



Contrary to expectations, the election of Ramaphosa as president of both party and country has not alleviated the image crisis of the ANC. In some ways, the gap between the ideals of the ANC and what the party has become is wider despite the (sometimes bellicose) calls and promises of unity and self-correction by many a party leader. 



At leadership level, the ANC remains divided and factionalized. Evidence that is being led in the different commissions of inquiry paints a picture of a former liberation movement whose members and leaders have become quite adept at things venal and corrupt. 



The ANC has become a metaphor for rent-seeking, state capture and the poor service delivery of the local state. 



In short, because of the state of the ruling party, the ANC should be trounced in these elections. Given the hollowness and shallowness of the alternatives, the ANC will suffer contractions in electoral support but will not lose power at national level. 



Put differently, notwithstanding the gap between the procedural and substantive aspects of our democracy, the levels of substantive uncertainty in our electoral politics will improve but will remain relatively low. 



In other words, despite the gap between what our constitution’s promises, on the one hand, and what our democracy actually delivers, on the other, the contractions the ANC will suffer in the May 8 elections will probably be felt more at provincial level than at national level. Why?



<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">First, according to recent polls, Ramaphosa’s approval rating, which is at about 55%, is not only higher than that of the ruling party but is also higher than that of the leaders of the main opposition parties. </blockquote>



This means that, despite the dismal state of qualitative decline of the ruling party at a leadership, intellectual, moral and strategic level, and despite Ramaphosa’s own subjective weaknesses as a leader, his approval rating will pull the ANC up. 



What will save the ANC, therefore, is the fact that its internal crisis is a subset of the broader crisis in our politics. 



Therefore, in addition to the Ramaphosa factor, the ANC will be saved from significant shifts in electoral support by the generalized crisis in our politics as well as the credibility deficit that has become one of the defining features of the political class of our country. In this regard, the state of opposition politics is instructive. 



A cursory look at the state of the official opposition, the Democratic Alliance (DA), tells the story of a party that is at sixes and sevens. The sociology and political economy of race in South Africa remains an unshakable albatross around the necks of the DA and its first black leader, Mmusi Maimane. 



Many, if not most, black voters still regard the DA as a racist party of whiteness, white capital and white interests. Objectively, it may not be true that the DA is a party of white minority interests. 



What matters, though, in electoral politics are the subjective perceptions of voters. As long as black voters continue to see the DA as a white party, the inroads the party makes into the traditional support base of the ANC will not be enough to dislodge the ANC as the ruling party. 



In my view, the DA is not a white party. It is a majority black party of white minority interests. 



Despite the fact that, under the tutelage of its former leader, Helen Zille, it succeeded in increasing its black membership and support, I still maintain that racism is not a dynamic that is completely external to the party. 



READ MORE | <a href="https://www.forbesafrica.com/focus/2019/02/10/the-claim-that-democracy-fares-better-in-the-west-than-in-africa-is-a-fallacy/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label="The Claim That Democracy Fares Better in the West Than in Africa Is a Fallacy (opens in a new tab)">The Claim That Democracy Fares Better in the West Than in Africa Is a Fallacy</a>



Also, I still contend that its ambivalence towards policy measures such as Black Economic Empowerment, affirmative action, land reform and employment equity despite the fact that, rhetorically, it now accepts that race remains a key indicator and predictor of disadvantage in South Africa, is a function of its colonial and paternalistic mindset. 



In addition, the DA will continue to perform below the levels desired by its leaders as long as black voters continue to regard Maimane as a puppet of white interests. 



I don’t share the view that Maimane is a puppet but do believe that there are too many in the party who see themselves as ventriloquists because of the colonial and paternalistic mindset of their whiteness, which I allude to above. 



My expectation, therefore, is that the DA is not going to breach the 30% threshold of which it has been desirous for some time. In fact, it will probably improve on its 2014 performance but may not reach 25%. 



If this happens, Maimane will be removed as party leader before or at the next Federal Congress of the party because of his failure to preside effectively over the DA’s internal racial policy and ideological tensions. If the black caucus of the party remains strong, Maimane will be succeeded by a black leader. 



Otherwise, his successor will be a white man. On the other hand, if the turnout of ANC voters is critically low and a sizable number of those who turn up vote for the DA and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), this scenario may not eventuate. 



Will the EFF benefit from the DA’s divisions at a racial, ideological and policy level?



The tragedy of South African politics is that it still does not have a political culture of strong opposition and the alternation of power between political parties despite the plurality of choices available to voters. 



By so saying, I am not aligning myself with the narrow and conservative conceptions of democratic consolidation which liberal democratic theorists always try to impose on the intended beneficiaries or victims of western modernity outside Europe and America. 



All I am saying is that single party dominance has been part of South African politics since 1948. The National Party was the ruling party from 1948 until 1994, and the ANC has been in power since 1994. The ANC will be in power, probably with a reduced majority, after the May 8 general election. 



The EFF will probably do better at provincial than at national level. We must not rule out the possibility that the ANC may lose power in Gauteng. Its own internal research suggests that it will fall below 50% in this province if it does not mount a serious effort. 



In the scenario, the EFF will be part of a coalition government in Gauteng because no party is likely to win an outright majority. Whether the ANC will be part of such a coalition government, in this scenario, will depend on the size of its relative majority if it does win such a majority. 



The EFF will put up a strong challenge in the North West province where it has strong support, and ANC support is dwindling. 



<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">Therefore, we cannot rule out the possibility that the EFF, on its own, or together with other parties, will dislodge the ANC in this province. </blockquote>



In the Limpopo Province, where, as is the case in the North West, the EFF is the official opposition, it will either dislodge or come very close to dislodging the ANC as the ruling party. 



At national level, the EFF has a problem. Its messaging resonate with many in the ANC support base. The problem is that the majority of voters do not believe the EFF is fit to govern. Therefore, I expect the EFF to improve on the 6% it garnered in 2014 and settle just below, or above, 10%.



Will this election deliver change? If it does, it will not do so significantly. Ramaphosa’s subjective weaknesses and limitations as a leader will show up much more strongly after the general election. His inability to make tough choices will become more apparent, with his disciples describing him as the consummate player of ‘the long game’. He will still not be able to govern without the consent of his opponents in the ANC.



-Aubrey Matshiqi is a Financial Mail rated political analyst for the second year in a row. He is also one of South Africa’s most in-demand speakers on the subject of the political state of the nation. 



-Opinions expressed by Forbes Africa contributors are their own Ticking the right boxes: Will the elections come down to the wire?

Ballot box with national flag on background – South Africa

Ticking The Right Boxes: Will The South African Elections Come Down To The Wire?

Land-024

The Complex And Contentious Land Reform

It is a peaceful 200-yard walk from the Cape Town city streets to the gates of Parliament, but inside it was loaded like a gun; anger blazed in the eyes of many for Jacob Zuma, President of South Africa for nearly seven years and head of the African National Congress (ANC).
A small group outside Parliament held up placards reading ‘ANC Betraying South Africa’. The leader, in a navy suit, who wishes to be known only as Michael, said they had taken their lunchbreak to voice their disgust.
“The ANC members here today must do the honorable thing and fire this president who flaunts our wealth.”
A man dressed in the darkness of death contrasted against Parliament’s bright white walls. He held a cardboard match to a cardboard Constitution as MPs floated past in their luxury vehicles.
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-4842" src="/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Parliament-_JC-5-of-14-300x200.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="200" />
Curious students across the way ran to see what the fuss is all about. One claimed Zuma is running the economy into the ground, another countered that he is too powerful to be ousted.
The street vendor, a few blocks down, didn’t care. He sold sweets and cigarettes to anyone who had money, be it Economic Freedom Fighter (EFF) red or ANC green and gold, as they shuffled toward Parliament. No one wanted to miss this one.
Inside, the debate raged like a fire on Table Mountain. The gallery was packed as leaders of the opposition parties tore into the ruling ANC. Mmusi Maimane, the first black leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), likened the ills of his opponents to a disease.
“Corruption has infected the entire party like a cancer. While our attention today focuses on a large and malignant tumour, we know that under the surface, the disease has replicated itself in every cell,” said Maimane.
“Today, it will be recorded that ANC members of Parliament chose to defend a crooked, broken president instead of the constitution and the rule of law. Today will signal once and for all that the ANC has lost its way and there’s absolutely no way back.”
Nhlanhla Khubisa, National Freedom Party secretary-general, called for the president to be elected by the citizens, and not by the party.
Pieter Mulder, Freedom Front Plus leader, reminded the ANC of the fate of their predecessor, Thabo Mbeki, who was recalled in 2008.
“His mistakes were 10 times less serious than Zuma&#8230; Sir, if ANC members once again ignore the facts of the last week… take my word for it, history will in a couple of years from now judge them very harshly and negatively,” said Mulder.
ANC MP and Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, John Jeffery, bit back.
“The DA claims the president seriously violated the Constitution, but here is the issue: the court did not find a serious violation of the Constitution as Section 89 (1) requires&#8230; The court did not declare Zuma violated his oath of office as the EFF had wanted.”
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-4843" src="/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Pieter-Mulder_JC-1-of-1-300x200.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="200" />
A statement was read out:
The Presidency wishes to correct media reports wrongly stating that the judgement by the Constitutional Court found that President Jacob Zuma had broken his oath of office. The Constitutional Court did not make such a declaratory order.
The Constitutional Court instead ruled that “The failure by the President to comply with the remedial action taken against him, by the Public Protector in her report of 19 March 2014, is inconsistent with section 83(b) of the Constitution read with sections 181(3) and 182(1)(c) of the Constitution and is invalid.
Votes were cast, results read, the dust settled and the opposition walked out – oh, by the way, Zuma won: 233 votes to 143.
<h1>How Did We Get Here?</h1>
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-4846" src="/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Ahmed-Kathrada-300x200.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="200" />
Even if President Jacob Zuma does survive, this fragile democracy will face an acid test on August 3. Millions of South Africans will go to the polls for municipal elections in which the ruling ANC is expected to lose ground.
How did we get here? Well, the tension has built since 2009, when the story of Nkandla broke. Seven years later, South Africa&#8217;s Constitutional Court – the highest in the land – found Zuma to have unduly benefited from $15 million worth of upgrades to his personal home in KwaZulu-Natal. The court stated Zuma failed to uphold, defend and respect the constitution as the supreme law of the land.
A humbled Zuma apologized publicly to the country on television. The ANC backed him.
&#8220;I wish to reiterate that any action that has been found not to be in keeping with the constitution happened because of a different approach and different legal advice&#8230; I never knowingly or deliberately set out to violate the constitution&#8230; It was never my intention not to comply with the remedial action taken against me by the Public Protector [Thuli Madonzela] or to disregard her office.&#8221;
Other loyalists called for more than an apology. Trevor Manuel, South Africa&#8217;s former finance minister, wanted resignation. Even Ahmed Kathrada, who faced death with Nelson Mandela in the 1960s, wrote a letter calling for Zuma to go.
&#8220;I know that if I were in the President’s shoes‚ I would step down with immediate effect,&#8221; wrote Kathrada.

Tag: EFF