Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
TOP LEADERS OF South Africa’s ruling ANC will meet today to “finalise” the departure of embattled President Jacob Zuma after party chief Cyril Ramaphosa promised to bring “closure” to the crisis.
Ramaphosa said at a party rally in Cape Town yesterday he wanted to replace “a period of difficulty, disunity and discord” with “a new beginning” for the party.
“We know you want this matter to be finalised,” he said to rapturous cheering, vowing to tackle the corruption that has tarnished Zuma’s government.
Zuma has clung to power after rejecting a request by his party’s senior officials to resign a week ago.
The powerful committee could recall the president from office, though he would be under no constitutional obligation to obey the order.
“We know you want closure – we will be doing so keeping our eyes on what is in the interests of all our people,” Ramaphosa said to loud applause.
“The National Executive Committee of the ANC will be meeting tomorrow to discuss this very matter – and because our people want this matter to be finalised, the NEC will be doing precisely that.”
Litha Madita (48), an NGO worker from Cape Town, welcomed the announcement of the NEC meeting, adding that Ramaphosa has spoken “to the aspirations of the South Africans”.
It brings hope that there is a new venture we are getting into.
But we have to respect (Zuma) as a former president of the ANC. It is important not to disrupt the country or bring violence into the country.
Zuma’s presidency has been marred by corruption scandals, slow economic growth and record unemployment that have fuelled public anger.
The stalemate over his departure has left Africa’s most developed economy in limbo, with a series of public events cancelled last week including Thursday’s State of the Nation address to parliament.
Opposition parties last week had threatened a “national shutdown” in response to Zuma’s refusal to resign – although it was unclear if the action would go ahead.
Dispute over exit deal?
Zuma’s hold over the ANC was shaken in December when his chosen successor – his former wife Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma – narrowly lost out to Ramaphosa in a vote to be the new party leader.
Yesterday’s rally was part of ANC celebrations marking 100 years since late leader Nelson Mandela’s birth – as well as efforts by Ramaphosa to try to revive the party’s tainted reputation ahead of next year’s general election.
“We have arrived at a moment in the history of our country where we can relive that moment when Nelson Mandela was released… we have a new mood right across the country, we can capture that mood and move forward,” said Ramaphosa.
He was speaking to mark the 28th anniversary of the speech Mandela gave in the same location after being released from prison.
It is understood that a key sticking point in the negotiations is the potentially ruinous legal fees Zuma is facing from prolonged court battles against multiple criminal cases.
He is also reportedly seeking legal protection for his family and other associates who have been involved in controversial deals.
“Even if the ANC meeting decides Zuma needs to step down, he can still refuse because they have no legal authority,” Mcebisi Ndletyana, politics professor at the University of Johannesburg, told AFP.
He is not willing to step down voluntarily. They need to close this thing early this week.
Opposition parties are calling for a parliamentary vote of no-confidence within days.
Decision time?
The ANC has insisted there will be no delay to the budget, which is due on 21 February.
Zuma has not spoken publicly since being asked to resign by senior ANC officials on 4 February.
In 2008, the party pushed out then-president Thabo Mbeki over allegations of abuse of power.
Under Zuma, the ANC won less than 54% of the vote in local elections in 2016.
That was its worst electoral performance since coming to power with Mandela at the helm in 1994.
They are going to start telling the truth?
Ah now… Be fair! This is the Daily Heil we’re talking about. They wouldn’t know the truth if it came up and slapped them on their “Outraged of Tunbridge Wells” arses.
The best possible change for that hate-filled, bile-spewing rag is to crawl back under the slimy rock it came out from, and to die there
Any chance they might stop printing this rag?
This rag only prints stuff to get a reaction…nothing more, they don’t care about the public interest or people’s well being. Don’t believe me…lets take one example from 2009 shall we…
In April 2009, blogger The Lay Scientist noted an interesting discrepancy in the policy of the Daily Mail. On the British edition, known for its scare stories on health, there was a demand to stop the compulsory administration of the HPV cervical cancer vaccine. This is fair enough as these people will go against any medical treatment given away for free.
However, on the Irish edition there was a campaign to “roll out the vaccine now!” demanding that the government issue it immediately – as in Ireland, it wasn’t going to be issued as freely as in Britain.
The Daily Mail and the Irish Daily Mail are owned by the same people and have the same (alleged) editorial stance – this wasn’t a case of The Guardian saying one thing and The Express saying another. This has led to people declaring that the Mail’s true position is “whatever the government is for, we’re against.”
source: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/18/bad-science-cancer-jabs-daily-mail
What the Hell is wrong with the people in the 10% market share . Why would u buy that tripe
It’s going to be savagely deleted from the annals of history?
Can one hope for too much?!?!
Your beloved Guardian is going broke. :)
I wouldnt wrap my fish and chips in the mail. But I winds up the hippies and diversity darlings no end.
Cant be that bad, so!
Loving this comment thread. It validates my hatred of this awful newspaper
Haters will hate but what do you know about the media and how it works?
If you’re looking to TheJournal.ie comment section for validation of your views, you’re doing something awfully wrong.
Good Point. I’ll get my coat
The “Irish” Daily Mail is so utterly offensive in every possible way. It’s tried it’s best to whip up outrage the way it does in the UK, but thankfully it hasn’t really worked.
I found it laughable that they were *attacking* Phil Hogan for saving his constituents from having to live with Travellers in the vicinity. The Fail is usually such a bastion of support for minorities!!
On that note its time for the Daily Mail Song
Knock them all you want but they’ve reported quite a few stories the other Irish papers wouldn’t touch.
Like ?
Mainly stories relating to the economic collapse and the people involved.
Here’s one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382368/I-shouted-stop-Finance-Department-mandarin-warned-crash-seven-times–ALL-ignored.html#ixzz1LDOFuNZg
They also did a good expose on Seanie Fitz and his lending to family members, including his college student daughter. I’m no particular fan of them, their agenda and the manner in which they report news but when actual Irish papers run scared of reporting news, we need an outside paper to do it. A good example is their story on Cowen asking the NTMA to invest in Anglo. That was the final nail in the coffin and brought about the early election. Because the IT and Indo didn’t have the balls to run that story, we could have been stuck with Cowen for longer.
Just because The Mail did “exposes” doesn’t mean that there was any truth to them whatsoever. Chances are these “exposes” were fabricated on a slow news day and peddled to their idiot readers as fact. The Daily Mail can piss off, and take that other virus The Sunday Independent with them.
Ruari, you can apply that to any news outlet. Regardless of you hating the Mail, the very fact that it’s not part of the establishment here, like the Indo and Times, is a good thing for the media in Ireland as like someone else commented, it means that the paper will take on stories that the other two wouldn’t touch.
Associated Newspapers may be British but painting both editions as one and the same is pure laziness. There are plenty of columnists in the Irish Mail who would be regularly critical of the British establishment (they even employ Joe Higgins for feck sake!) and most of the reporters are Irish thereby ensuring most of the stories are Irish. Yes, it goes to extremes with its awful coverage of the British royals but all the others do it too.
Oh, I disagree… I wouldn’t think that the Indo are averse to making up a story or two to peddle their muck. But I agree with you about the Irish Times. They are way too reputable.
changing editors causes/cures cancer.
People who read thejournal hate the daily mail.
How utterly predictable.
I honestly can’t understand how anyone wouldn’t hate the Daily Mail… aside from the people who work for it, obviously!
Well, I don’t know either as I don’t buy it. ;)
However, if you start reading it online, you’ll find it strangely addictive…
You’d be surprised by some articles (and utterly unsurprised by others), like the one about “Was Monty’s finest hour just a pointless bloodbath? Historians claim El Alamein – which began 70 years ago today – sacrificed thousands for the sake of propaganda”
Not what one would expect from the Daily Mail…
People who set up twitter account’s just to comment on the journal support the daily mail, how surprising.
rag
The Daily Hate Mail was rabidly anti-Irish throughout the 20th century. You could have knocked me over with a feather when they opened an Irish edition. Surely the most racist and vitriolic paper in respect of the Irish ever to see print couldn’t get a foothold here, I thought? You’d have better chances selling signed photos of George W Bush in Bin Laden’s cave, I thought. But no. There’s clearly 10% of people with no understanding of recent, modern history whatsoever.
Or they just bought it for the free CDs.
The Irish editions are decent enough reads
good crossword, good sports and good for lighting the fire
There’s no real journalism in that paper, just regurgitations of comments and stories found online that they then “quote” as said to their reporters. It’s a joke!
” Whatever the government is for, they’re against” They just print stuff to create a reaction” etc etc. Sounds like a paper made for the majority of commentors on the Journal if you ask me. What’s the problem? :)
Ink never refused paper!…as they say…also today’s newspaper,tomorrow’s fish and chip wrapper..:-)..
have your say