Ramaphosa questioned on ANC cadre deployment committee

Zondo Commission informed that there are no deployment committee minutes for the years 2012 to 2017.
The commission called for ANC records of disciplinary procedures, and there is no record of any of its members being disciplined in relation to corruption. Image: Elmond Jiyane, GCIS

Wednesday (August 11) saw Cyril Ramaphosa appear before the Zondo Commission of Inquiry to give evidence on state capture in his capacity as president and former deputy president of the Republic of South Africa.

He previously gave evidence in his capacity as president of the ANC (on April 28 and 29).


Previous discussion on cadre deployment

Evidence leader Paul Pretorius gave an overview of what had previously been discussed with Ramaphosa before the commission.

There is a hard and a soft definition in regard to the deployment committee. The hard definition is that the committee instructs and commands in relation to appointments. The soft definition is that it merely makes a recommendation to the appointing authority or entity, and no more.

Pretorius said they had also discussed other forms of appointment:

  • Those where the deployment committee imposed its will on the appointing authority, simply by the exercise of its leadership.
  • And those where there is no intervention by the deployment committee at all, for example where the previous president, and even Ramaphosa, had made an appointment.

Pretorius put it to Ramaphosa that the soft definition of deployment is not borne out by the facts.

He added that strong evidence has been led before the commission that the deployment committee commands and instructs and at times makes the relevant appointments.

Pretorius said that deployment committee minutes would have represented a “contemporaneous decision” that the deployment committee made in any particular period.

However, the commission was told that there are no deployment committee minutes for the years 2012 to 2017.

Pretorius asked Ramaphosa if these minutes had been lost or destroyed, or whether minutes were not kept.

Ramaphosa carefully considered this and said that he did not recall having gone through the minutes of previous meetings when he was chair of the committee.

He said the deployment committee was an organisation always “on the go”, and dealing with “so many issues”, and that this was merely “an unfortunate record-keeping process”.

“We always dealt with the issues at hand,” he said.

“The ANC had so many committee meetings, one after the other …”

Pretorius finds it improbable that minutes were not kept. 

Further dissection of cadre deployment

Pretorius put the following suppositions to Ramaphosa, and asked for his comments:

  • The deployment committee prescribes and instructs.
  • The appointing authority recommends, and the deployment committee makes the decision, and this is the predominant way the deployment committee goes about its work.
  • On many occasions ministers come to the deployment committee to seek permission to proceed with the appointment process.
  • Ministers are called to account by the deployment committee when they present names to fill vacancies without having been supervised or directed by the committee.
  • There are several occasions where loyalty to the party, party membership, and compliance with party prescripts is relevant to the appointment.
  • Ministers’ recommendations are sometimes sent back to the deployment committee for refinement.
  • Occasionally the deployment committee would insist that it is notified even before the placement of an advert for a position.

Ramaphosa said it is “sad that the hard definition of the deployment committee is what has always prevailed”. But at the end there is a “safety process” and the “legally mandated governance process must be followed”.

Ramaphosa explained that the committee is elected to institute a particular mandate, and “we appoint people to synchronise that mandate”.

“They will have independence to execute actions, but within a broad mandate,” he said.

Commission chair Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo said it seems to him that the real decisions are taken by the party, and asked what the principle is in regard to the deployment committee.

Ramaphosa answered in a roundabout way: “Our democracy is such that the political party is the vehicle through which the people support the party. The party plays a key role, but it is just one of the actors in our democracy. It is not the only actor.”

He then tried to explain that the party will take a stand where there is no gender balance in an appointment, and will not agree to that appointment. As well as where there is no demographic balance, or where youth need to be appointed. “The party plays an important role and is the standard bearer of the values that we wish to see in society.”


Pretorius referred to a meeting of the deployment committee on March 22, 2019, regarding vacancies in the judiciary.

The deployment committee recommended two justices to fill vacancies in the Constitutional Court, and recommended a judge to fill a position in the Supreme Court of Appeal, and in other capacities as well, including that of deputy judge president.

Pretorius asked Ramaphosa what the committee is doing recommending appointments to the judiciary, saying: “This must have been intended to influence the committee.”

This set Ramaphosa off into a paroxysm of laughter. Still laughing, he explained that at best the deployment committee knows it can only recommend, it cannot appoint. More laughter.

Settling down, Ramaphosa, straight-faced, said: “It could never ever have a judge appointed … we need to have a gender balance … we need to have a demographic balance …”

Ramaphosa distinguished between influence and appointment, saying “in the end the ANC deployment committee is not the appointing structure”.

Zondo suggested that if the party or the deployment committee wants to influence the appointment of certain people within government, it should do so transparently, so that everyone knows.

Zondo said the influence of the deployment committee can be quite weighty on the members of the Judicial Service Commission, who are ANC members of parliament, and they would not want to go against such an important structure of the ANC.

Ramaphosa did finally concede that the idea of transparency appealed to him.

In reply to Ramaphosa’s generalisation of international norms of dominant political parties making key appointments, Pretorius replied that South Africa’s Constitution demands the highest standards, even when compared with international standards.

Discipline and accountability

Pretorius referred to instances of corruption within the ranks of the party, and that the ANC was to identify the areas where the party has done its homework, and where it did not do the things it should have. This is necessary to see what should be put in place in the future, he said.

Pretorius said the commission has called for ANC records of disciplinary procedures. There is no record of any ANC member being disciplined in relation to corruption.

Despite the prevalence of corruption since the 1990s, the party has not found anyone guilty of corruption.

Ramaphosa said the ANC has drawn a line in the sand. The ANC is renewing itself, and corruption will be dealt with.



Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in and an Insider Gold subscriber to comment.


Rammy Mc Phailure — No Minutes kept of the hours spent planning the looting !!!

This was the most sleazy and least convincing Ramaphosa has ever appeared behind a microphone.

No minutes? Rubbish, that is a blatant lie and he VERY carefully selected his words in how he responded. I don’t recall, things were hectic, we lapsed, etc etc. Those minutes will still come out, too many ANC royalty are caught in the spotlight of this purge and will lash out. Somewhere there is a set of minutes that is deeply embarrassing to Rampahosa. Brian Molefe’s appointment at Eskom comes to mind – CR ducked and dived answering about his recommending Molefe.

He also avoided admitting that at times candidates were deployed that were grossly incompetent for the specific job.

Disappointing Mr President!

Well he is the head of the slease party after all.

The ANC is an organised crime syndicate. The head my change but the organisation stays the same. They just shuffle members around while they discuss how next to rip off South Africa.

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if the ANC orchestrated the generator explosion at Medupi just to shift the public focus a little, and get more of those juicy tenders.

On a side note, the ANC is never going to put Zuma in jail.

He is one of them.

I have often wondered if there are skilled people that can/do analyse the video footage to detect deception, or outright lying, by interviewees and witnesses. It must be possible and would be super interesting to see.

Very easy… Just watch for movement in the politicians mouth/ lip area.

The ANCs cadre deployment is not only unconstitutional, it’s destroying the country.

The ANC and their twisted policies are to blame and Ramaphooohoo knows this.

He is part of it.

Some have mastered the art of the “Stalingrad Tactic” and others have mastered the art of “Smooth Political Talk”.

Did anybody really expect any honesty from the frog boiler ? Cyril survived for many years ANC infighting only to maneuver himself to the top job in the political mob. Honest , straight forward persons would never survive in such a corrupt and back stabbing environment.

Ramaphosa cannot admit that he knew of the plundering perpetrated by his ANC comrades.

That would be an admission that he committed crimes himself.

So, the president lied under oath about his own criminality. Majestic.

I suppose FW de Klerk was also “unaware” of apartheid.

The quality of employees and functionaries reflects directly on the business owner who appointed them. Incompetent people appoint incompetent people. Managers of low cognitive ability never realize their own shortcomings and also fail to recognize counterproductive personality traits in others. This inevitably reduces the selection criteria down to factors that will provide immediate personal gain for the appointing body. Then, the selection process is not about future contributions, but on immediate benefit rather. We have to appoint this person, not for his intelligence, skills, and honesty, but because he brings us the support of 1000 stupid voters in Nkandla.

This opens the door for the slightly more intelligent, but vastly more unscrupulous individuals to use the system to their advantage. How do you rise to the top in a socialist organization like the ANC? Well, you have to convince ignorant, shortsighted, self-interested, and uneducated voters, who own nothing, to support you. It is very easy to impress stupid people. Julius Malema and the late Eugene Terblanche built impressive movements on this concept. This explains the only reason why the ANC is a majority in parliament.

You advertise yourself to the ANC Central Command Cadre Deployment Authority by gathering a crowd of unemployed people in your community and then proceed to burn tyres, a school and a library, maybe a person or two a well. Depending on the amount of smoke and destruction you can create, you will get a position in the ANC hierarchy. The entire organisation is built upon a destructive selection process. The ANC cannot act against corruption because it selects for corruption. It appoints, incentivises and rewards corruption and destruction. The ANC integrity committee is a farce that aims to present a veneer of accountability in a criminal organisation. It is lipstick on a pig. If this body was effective, we would not need a Zondo Commission.

Couldn’t agree more with this comment.

So we have paid for another day of blatant lies at the daily Zondo show.

This guy is supposed to have a degree, lets not mention what degree as that my just explain everything.

He has now lowered himself to the zuma level, for those that don’t know, the Zuma level is that layer in the ocean that is just below shark excrement.

Beyond words but we should have expected that, from a beggar in the street to an illiterate farm worker to the president, no one is responsible or takes the blame for anything.

When my farm staff were asked about anything dodgy, standard reply was “I don’t know” or I can’t remember” now the same with this lot. difference is they run the country, soon to be another failed state.

SA the last piece in the Failed continent jigsaw puzzle. Cry for our beloved country.

The whitewash for stooge Cyril has been blended with the best air freshener that the taxpayers money can buy. Now if you want any future business you had better make sure that everyone believes it.

Remember seeing old signs growing up in SA saying, “Mr Angazi wanted dead or alive” …

It’s the culture! They love that word, or should I say those words… culture and angazi!

A company and a country share similar chains of accountability.

When the company’s board and managers make mistakes, the shareholders carry the cost in direct proportion to their shareholding. Members of the public who do not own shares are not directly affected. The voting rights of the owner are in direct proportion to his shareholding. The power of the vote depends on what the investor has to lose. This fair and just system enforces a direct chain of command and accountability for the benefit of shareholders, workers, and consumers. This is a highly efficient and productive system.

Citizens are not equal. Some own more assets(shares in the country) than others. Some own a factory, shopping centre, or farm, while others own a shack, and most own nothing. Some citizens employ people, while others are employees. Those individuals who own the most assets stand to lose the most when a government makes mistakes. Firstly, those wealthy individuals do not receive dividends from the state, they pay dividends to the state. They pay for the privilege of owning assets, but their vote is equal to the person who has nothing to lose and who pay nothing to the state.

This unequal spreading of risk and costs prevents capital owners from investing in a country if they cannot trust the functionality of the other shareholder(voters). An investor buys the attitude of his fellow voters when he invests in the country because their voting power is equal to his. They can outvote him, even though he stands to lose more than them. This unjust and unfair situation enable some voters to vote for a living, while others must work for a living. Where is the social justice and quality in this situation?

The investment strike, shrinking economy and unemployment rate prove that investors think that the attitude of a communalist voter is worthless, or even destructive. The Zondo Commission proves the validity of this perception.

Why would anyone keep minutes of structured looting?

This morning’s headland in The Witness reads, “Don’t vote for the ANC”.

In it, Zuma’s supporters lament the fact that the ANC sat with folded arms while Zuma was being incarcerated! It is doubtful whether they make up sufficient numbers to bother the ANC much but just maybe they could force the moderates to either jettison the worst rotten apples to form a coalition with the more sober-minded opposition parties, or not. One can only hope and dream.

His “outpourings” at the commission – was that to get people exuding sympathy for him is it merely a reflection that the majority of the ANC “top brass” are nothing but a limp wristed bunch of useless’.
Makes you wonder how this country will ever amount to anything of significance on the world stage under the ANC

Will we see someone in orange overalls ? Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent. Adam Smith (1723-1790)

Did CR come into power in 2018 and continue to add to the rot that took place under Zuma’s 9 year term? No!
Did he continue to move and place dodgy people in government positions only to benefit him in order to continue the corruption? No!
Did he make significant changes to strengthen the NPA in order to bring back law and order? Yes!
Did he make significant changes at SARS to reduce corruption so that tax revenue could be collected and spent properly? Yes!
Is he getting credit for these actions? No!
Do people ever just give credit were it’s due? No!
Can people ever just see the forest for the trees? No!

Sad that CR’s testimony only highlights sheer incompetence.
If he did not know what was going on then what was he doing at all.

So when then burning of trucks and looting started we were told by our President that there was going to be a response and it would take 3 days for the planning to be completed before it was rolled out. Then he sat on his hands for 3 days while the looting and burning escalated and over 300 were killed. Then he said that the organizing culprits of the insurrection were known and that there would be arrests. So who were they? Still no arrests. Then he performed the shuffle and placed the suspect Intelligence dept. “under his wing”. He operates in Cape Town and they operate from Pretoria. And thats it, problem solved. All is well with the loyal indigenous because they don’t even know what he is talking about. I would like to know if he intends to be the party stooge like this for the remainder of his Presidency. And if he expects any respect from anyone with more than 30% of a functional brain.

End of comments.




Instrument Details  

You do not have any portfolios, please create one here.
You do not have an alert portfolio, please create one here.

Follow us:

Search Articles:
Click a Company: