The Institute of Race Relations has written significantly on South Africa’s almost inevitable move to national coalition politics.
The reasons for this are, first, that change in support at local level has increasingly moved us from an era of majority party politics to multi-party coalitions. This happens when no party achieves majority support from voters. Consequently, opposition parties will have to go into coalitions with other parties to achieve the majority necessary to govern.
This allows for a unique possibility in the South African context. The long-term incumbent (the ANC) may not achieve its customary majority. If then it can’t enter into a governing coalition, the opposition parties can achieve what was once unthinkable. Messy as they have been, coalitions at local level help inform what may be necessary at national and provincial level in 2024.
Neither the Constitution nor legislation regulate coalition agreements. There are no obligations on political parties to conclude coalition agreements as a precondition for the establishment of governing coalitions.
Misgovernance, corruption, black economic empowerment and cadre deployment have left South Africa in a dire situation, so the ANC may just lose power. If opposition parties can form a majority coalition, they can govern in a way South Africa has never been governed before.
We are familiar with coalitions in the metropoles, mostly as sites of contestation which have more to do with naked political ambition and little or nothing to do with the provision of services.
In light of these public and ugly contests, late last year Democratic Alliance (DA) leader John Steenhuisen said: ‘We cannot afford to replace failing ANC governments – whether at a national, provincial or local level – with unstable, cumbersome coalitions.’ Yet, this is exactly what happened in the Johannesburg, Tshwane, Ekurhuleni and Nelson Mandela Bay metros after the 2021 local government elections. In these metros, residents face the constant risk of disrupted service delivery.
‘If the current state of metro coalitions is replicated at national and provincial government levels post 2024,’ Steenhuisen warned, ‘it will lead to permanent instability, with South Africa possibly even becoming ungovernable.’
Professor Pierre De Vos in The Constitutional-Legal Dimensions of Coalition Politics and Government in South Africa notes that it is usually easier to get party regulars to approve concessions to coalition partners when they are included in a package deal. A coalition agreement may also reduce the potentially destabilising impact of small “kingmaker” parties.
A formal coalition can include a shared policy agenda, with an agreement on which executive posts would be held by which party. Such an agreement could create formal mechanisms to facilitate inter-party consultation and dispute resolution.
Steenhuisen notes: ‘A coalition agreement is currently just a document of goodwill between parties, with no consequences for breaching it.’
It was unlikely that a new legislative framework would be in place in time for the 2024 election. But perhaps to our surprise, this has just happened.
On 16 and 17 August, a coalition convention was held at Emperor’s Palace in Kempton Park. This is the site of the old World Trade Centre, where the 1991 negotiating forum, the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA), was held.
The seven parties meeting as part of the Multi-Party Charter for South Africa were the DA, Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), Freedom Front Plus (FF+), ActionSA, United Independent Movement (UIM), Independent SA National Civic Organisation (Isanco) and the Spectrum National Party (SNP).
The convention was chaired by Professor William Gumede, an associate professor at the University of the Witwatersrand’s School of Governance and the author of Restless Nation: Making Sense of Troubled Times.
Gumede said the participants had agreed that any parties hoping to join must share the same values, as set out by the coalition.
The convention agreed that:
- their pre-election agreement be rebranded as the Multi-Party Charter for South Africa;
- more parties could join the pact in a bid to secure 50% plus one of the vote, in order to constitute a government after the election. The ANC and the EFF would be excluded;
- all participants shared a vision to ‘build a just, inclusive and prosperous South Africa based on opportunity, freedom and security for all its citizens’;
- priorities included ending load-shedding, growing the economy, creating jobs and delivering basic services to all through the provision of high-quality infrastructure;
- a set of shared governing principles includes
- the rule of law;
- equality before the law;
- accountable, transparent government with zero tolerance for corruption;
- decentralisation of power to the lowest effective level of government;
- capable government that spends public money efficiently to deliver quality services to all;
- an open market economy;
- a caring government that puts people first and prioritises the poor;
- the adoption of policies ‘guided by evidence that they produce positive results for society’;
- redressing the unjust past by promoting non-racialism and unity in diversity;
- ensuring quality education that delivers opportunities for all; and
- ensuring quality healthcare for all within a caring system.
The parties also agreed on using a proportional system to determine exactly how they would share positions.
A decision was made that the leader of government business will be the leader of the biggest party.
‘The largest party in a coalition in the National Assembly that arises from this agreement, and that does not hold the position of President of the Republic, will hold the position of Leader of Government Business.’
Steenhuisen said: ‘The leader of government business in the current configuration is the Deputy President, but the two positions are distinct in the Constitution; it is dealt with in section 91(4) and 91(5). The leader of government business is an incredibly important position. It is the nexus for the legislative agenda; getting reforms passed is going to be so fundamentally important’.
This provision appears to envision that Steenhuisen may not be the president for strategic reasons, but would instead hold the leader of government business position.
Gumede said the party leaders ‘showed great maturity’ in reaching the initial agreement, which was historic because it was the first of its kind in the post-apartheid era.
IFP president Velenkosini Hlabisa was quoted as saying: ‘Collectively, we agree that whoever should lead the charter for South Africa as a president should be decided once the results are out.’ No one party would be given an ‘advantage at the expense of other parties’, he said.
On the issue of positions, no decision will be taken in advance; after the election the best people will be chosen.
Positions will be awarded based on merit and principle, while the diversity of parties must be represented in leadership positions, and the principle of separation of powers should be observed within the coalition.
The agreement states: ‘We will not entertain any working arrangement or co-governing agreements with the ANC, EFF or any rival formations, and we will not vote for any office bearers of the ANC and EFF — nominated either directly or indirectly — at any inaugural meetings of the National Assembly, National Council of Provinces, and provincial legislatures.”
The agreement is strongly critical of cadre deployment and aims to build a professional public service instead.
The parties also agreed that a ‘fundamental and wholesale review of the Ministerial Handbook be initiated to ensure that a Cabinet of a new multi-party coalition government reflects the need to redirect budget resources to address the pressing needs of South Africans’.
The agreement ‘will only cease to exist by unanimous resolution of the signatory parties or upon the adoption of a multi-party coalition agreement being agreed after the 2024 national and provincial elections’.
Some have criticised the Charter for its lack of diversity. The Charter states: ‘The collective cabinet or executive committee must reflect the diversity of the South African people’, but the negotiation team had only three women.
That should be a matter for the parties to decide rather than insisting on a paint-by-numbers approach which has done little for the country. If women want to participate in a future government, they must put themselves forward and demand the right to be treated equally based on merit, not targets.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, however. But this is a most hopeful start.