By Bheki Mngomezulu
The monologue in a pastoral comedy by William Shakespeare and the poem, which was recited by Jaques entitled “As you like it” painted a broader picture about life when they stated that “All the world’s a stage”.
The seven stages mentioned in this poem include being an infant and thus entering the stage, going to school, becoming a lover and getting married, being a soldier and being put under pressure to excel and receive honours, being old and assuming the position of a role model, going back to childhood by being weak and helpless again, and, lastly, exiting the stage or passing away.
With no exception, everyone goes through these stages. What we do between stages one and six determines how we are remembered once stage seven kicks in. Pravin Gordhan is not an exception in this regard.
To many South Africans, Gordhan’s passing on September 13, 2024, came as a shock. By contrast, to those who were close to him – both as family members and as political comrades, the announcement about Gordhan’s passing was something they were already expecting. Having watched his life deteriorate, they knew that the day of his passing was imminent.
Everyone remembers Gordhan in one way or another. There are those who have sung his praises and gave him accolades for a life well lived to the extent of painting him as a saint. Their conclusion is predicated on their knowledge of him as a family member, a friend, a liberation fighter and a comrade, a dependable government official, and a proponent of good governance and constitutionalism.
To others, however, Gordhan will be remembered as a bully, a partisan politician, an autocratic administrator, a vindictive and a spiteful individual, among other things. Depending on the evidence people put forward for their assessment of this man, it would be easy to echo or dismiss their sentiments.
Therefore, it is safe to say that Gordhan was a hero to some, but he was something else to others. In the literary language Gordhan can be classified as a ‘round character’ who personified different identities.
Because so many good things have been said about this man, it is important to enumerate a few other things which present a different side to his life. This is the only way in which we can do justice to him instead of portraying him as a saint, which he was not. Even Mandela once said that he was not a saint unless by a saint people meant a sinner who keeps on repenting.
Pravin Jamnandas Gordhan was born on April 12, 1949. Since his passing on September 13, 2024, many of those who commented about his life focused on his political activities.
This does not come as a surprise. Gordhan’s political life did not begin in the ANC and SACP of which he had dual membership. It can be traced back to 1971 when he joined the Natal Indian Congress (NIC) – an organisation which was formed to mobilise the Indian community against apartheid. In 1974 he was elected to the NIC’s Executive Council.
The experience Gordhan gained in the NIC made him an asset to the United Democratic Front (UDF). He was there in 1983 when the UDF was formally established. The NIC became one of its affiliates.
Since the UDF was linked to the ANC, it did not come as a surprise when Gordhan was recruited into the ANC’s underground structures. For that he paid the price of other liberation fighters by being incarcerated and detained. Luckily for him, he did not pay the ultimate price of being killed by the apartheid operatives. After going underground, he resurfaced in 1990, only to be arrested for participating in the ANC’s Operation Vula.
After being granted indemnity, Gordhan played a key role during the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) negotiations.
In recognition of his contribution, Gordhan was appointed into different positions. These included being Deputy Commissioner at SARS (later becoming Commissioner), Minister of Finance (twice), Minister of COGTA, and Minister of State-owned enterprises.
But if Gordhan was such a great freedom fighter as many have described him, what made him earn political enemies? This is the question that will assist in painting a broader picture about him.
Without refuting the accolades given to Gordhan by his associates, the last two decades saw him deviating from what he represented for many years as he grew up. This deviation can be traced from different episodes.
Firstly, Gordhan became factional in the ANC. His resentment of former president Zuma was an open secret. Their sour relationship was aggravated when Zuma relieved him and Mcebisi Jonas from the Finance portfolio. Although Zuma had invoked Section 84 of the Constitution when doing a Cabinet reshuffle, the two leaders took offence and personalised their removal.
In an unprecedented move, they toured the country addressing various audiences and projecting themselves as victims. Sadly, when the matter went to court, the latter agreed with them and instructed Zuma to explain himself as to why he replaced them.
This did not make sense and was tantamount to disrespecting the separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. Justifiably, President Ramaphosa appealed this judgement when he replaced Zuma albeit prematurely.
Secondly, as minister of State-owned Enterprises, Minister Gordhan did not do a good job. The collapse of Transnet, Eskom, and other institutions worsened under his leadership. The country is still dealing with the consequences of these failures.
Thirdly, many people have applauded Gordhan for being the key witness during the Zondo Commission. They have constantly praised him for exposing corruption under the Zuma administration.
What they failed to ask was if Gordhan ceased to be the political head in his ministry while Zuma was the country’s President. Importantly, did the state of these enterprises improve after Zuma had been forced to resign as President?
Fourthly, it was Gordhan who oversaw the collapse of the national carrier, South African Airways (SAA). This was a huge embarrassment to the country. At independence, many African countries took pride in establishing national airlines. Contrary to the norm, Gordhan facilitated the collapse of SAA.
Although the Takatso deal which gave 51 percent ownership of SAA to this company while leaving 49 percent to the government was said to have been above board, the reality is that collapsing SAA was a bad idea from many fronts.
Fifthly and lastly, the fact that Gordhan remained in Cabinet for this long is not because he was the best-performing minister as others want us to believe. Instead, his proximity to President Ramaphosa meant that he literally became ‘untouchable’. It was only his ill-health which forced him to leave Parliament in May 2024.
Therefore, while it would be wrong to advance a view that Gordhan did nothing for this country, it would be equally disingenuous to portray him as a saint. He may have done good things for the country in his earlier political life, but derailed midway through his journey and reversed some of the gains he had made.
On these grounds, Gordhan was not a saint. Any attempt to portray him as such would be a disservice to him and his legacy.
* Prof Bheki Mngomezulu is the Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy (CANRAD) at the Nelson Mandela University.
** The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media