THAMI DICKSON | Cracks being exposed in facade of DA integrity

There’s a Xhosa proverb about human character that says, “Isisila senkukhu sibonwa mhla ligquthayo”, literally meaning “the chicken’s tail is seen on a windy day.”

It comes from the observation that a chicken’s tail is usually fully covered by feathers.

But when strong winds blow, the feathers are lifted, exposing what was previously hidden.

This proverb captures a very important aspect of life, that true character is rarely revealed in moments of comfort, but in times of pressure and testing.

I believe this principle applies to politics.

The commitment of some political parties to principle seems strongest when they are insulated from the difficult realities of being in government.

From the opposition benches, they champion lofty principles, condemn the actions of those in power, and demand the highest standards of accountability and ethical conduct.

It is only when a party enters government that the sincerity of its principles is truly put to the test.

The DA is facing this moment.

The winds of government power seem to be blowing through the party, lifting feathers of its rhetoric, and exposing cracks in the facade of integrity it has projected for years.

Following its recent federal congress, at which a new party leadership was elected, the DA reshuffled its representation in the government of national unity.

The changes saw former party leader John Steenhuisen demoted from his ministerial position to being a deputy in another department, while other senior DA figures were elevated to deputy ministerial positions, the very positions the party had previously argued were unnecessary and campaigned to abolish.

On their own, these developments are hardly unprecedented.

But they expose a contradiction between the DA’s principles and its conduct in government.

Whenever the ANC elevated its newly elected leaders to government positions through cabinet reshuffles, the DA would be among the loudest voices condemning the practice.

It would sharply criticise the ANC, saying it was treating government appointments as an extension of internal party politics.

It would insist that government jobs should not be used as a reward system for internal political contests, and portray ANC appointments as cadre deployment, patronage and erosion of the distinction between party and state.

Today, the DA is in government, benefiting from the very practice it spent years condemning.

Again, the DA is facing shocking allegations that its former leader, Tony Leon, has leveraged his proximity to DA ministers in the cabinet to broker engagements between government officials and private-sector clients, using as a conduit his consulting firm, Resolve Communications.

What makes these allegations even more controversial is the DA downplaying them as normal in a democracy.

Yet, over the years, many black businesspeople have endured intense reputational damage, accused of using their proximity to ANC ministers for personal benefit or to advance the interests of their clients.

The DA was always among the most vocal critics in such cases, arguing that any blurring of the line between political access and private business interests posed a threat of state capture and damage to good governance.

But now that one of its own is accused of engaging in the very conduct the party has spent years condemning the ANC for, the DA’s response is conspicuously muted.

There is no outrage, condemnation or relentless demand for accountability that has so often characterised its response when similar allegations involve businesspeople linked to the ANC. This is double standards.

The DA has always created this super-clean image of itself, as a party guided by ethics, merit and principled governance, the antithesis of the patronage, factionalism and political expediency it always associates with the ANC.

It has always preached that should it ever be in government, it would act differently and hold itself to a different standard.

But that is not what we see today.

It’s a problem when the principles the DA uses to judge others, suddenly disappear when they become inconvenient to itself.

It can’t claim moral high ground when it applies one set of rules to its opponents and another set to itself.

If facilitating access to cabinet ministers for private clients is wrong when it is done by ANC associates, then surely the same energy should apply when the allegations involve former leaders of the DA.

It can’t defend or rationalise certain practices when they involve DA individuals, yet condemn the same conduct as unethical and corrosive to good governance when its political rivals are affected.

That is not principled leadership but political hypocrisy.

Thami Dickson, media professional and commentator on African affairs.