South Africa needs
leadership to be different. It has a solid constitutional order and a vibrant
democracy. Its people have risen to their obligation to regulate the tyranny of
political arbitrariness, which refers to the abuse of power or decision-making
without regard for the rule of law. Its voters have demonstrated the power of
their discretion. It is becoming clear that the RSA leadership functions are
growing so unique and specialised that a mistake in filling a vacancy in the
Presidency in the future may bring the country to a complete halt. The
succession conversation must be different from what happened in the past. 

The
maturing South African multiparty democracy tests political parties’ capability
to manage the internal multi-factional character of their succession battles. Leaders
indeed come and go, yet the system in which they operate is often there to stay,
thus making leaders finite and leadership function infinite. To execute a
long-term and hegemonic plan, countries and organisations require the right
people in the correct positions at the right times.

Leaders who are accidents
of a democratic outcome are costing nations their future. It is therefore
no longer what parties want as their leaders that is important to society, but
what the country needs out of leadership that will make the difference.
Internal to political party consensuses will henceforth no longer be an
abstraction of what would be the national consensus. The template and criteria
of who should lead have shifted. In the vocabulary of Dr Naledi Pandor, the
sand has shifted under the feet of all would-be leadership enthusiasts.

South
Africa is in a raging debate about its national leadership succession. Never
has the post-apartheid state been in a context with such ambiguity about who
will be the next President after Cyril Ramaphosa. This is not only a
consequence of the declining voter support of the ANC, arguably the predominant
nexus of South African politics. It relates to the available options in the
national landscape and across the board. Beyond party political lines, the
aggregate leadership complex continuously indicates that the pool needs to be
expanded to increase options.

What
the historically dominant ANC has to offer, in the unlikely event of becoming a
majority party, including as part of a coalition, is choked by a
blood-on-the-floor succession battle. Its factions are in a scorched earth type
battle where the death or collapse of the ANC is an option some would consider
if their faction does not ascend. Save for the crab-in-the-cage type of
fighting, a metaphor for a situation where each individual’s ambition or
self-interest hinders the group’s progress, there are integrity challenges that
lay a heavy burden on the country to consider some of its prominent and brandished
contenders. 

Without
sounding judgmental about the considerations from within the dominant political
formations, notably the ANC, of those who remain on the list, few, if any, have
gross and complex-to-clear ethics and integrity issues. Only when the net is
cast beyond those close to or inside the proverbial political fighting ring can
the ANC have profoundly promising green shoots the country can work with. Parties
should put a high premium on
the selection of those they commission and deploy into the executive authority centres
of South Africa.

As citizens, we
have a crucial role in shaping the national value system. This obligation must be anchored in the inclusion and involvement of South Africa’s entire cognitive collective. The focus should be on fostering a
leadership firmament that encourages creativity in thought and in practice.

Given
the integrity-compromising reporting on several contenders, it is easy to
characterise some as having a bigger reputation or otherwise dung balls to push
around. More dung beetle-type leaders are in the succession discourse than the
country can afford. If not careful, South Africa might institutionalise the appointment of ethics and integrity-compromised individuals to its
highest offices. 

With
the lapse of integrity, and there are commissions of enquiry reports, public
protector investigation reports, media exposés, and ongoing investigations to
prove the assertion, the country needs to look deeper into its closets and
unearth an ethical and integrity-safeguarding cohort of leaders. The need to
find a reset button with which society can enjoy the benefits of being properly
led lies in how it chooses leaders going forward. 

Since
it takes a ton of leadership to produce an ounce of national greatness, it can
take an ounce of bad leadership to make a global or national catastrophe unless
we revisit the criteria of what it truly takes to be a South African President.
The character of those who raise or have raised their hands to lead us will
always set the standard. We must be cautious, because no nation, society,
company, or organisation has been able to rise above the imagination of those
who lead, unless through a rebellion or revolution. 

South Africa has individuals
with talent. Some are within the current mix of politicians, and some are
outside the political catchment. The technical skills, knowledge, and proven
success attributes of those we allow to lead us will make the difference we
need to be a great nation again. Political Dung Beetles must be left to push
the dung they have collected.