By Nco Dube | 30 March 2026

There comes a point in the life of a political organisation when the rulebook stops being enough. When legality, procedure, and technical compliance no longer persuade a public that has watched too much go wrong for too long. 

The African National Congress (ANC) has reached that point. The decision to allow disgraced Minister Senzo Mchunu, currently on special leave following grave allegations, to resume his role as a member of the ANC’s National Executive Committee (NEC) is not merely a misreading of public sentiment. It is a profound failure to grasp the depth of the trust deficit between the ANC and the South African people.

This moment is not about whether any internal rules were broken. It is about whether the ANC and Senzo Mchunu himself understand that they have lost the luxury of hiding behind them.

The NEC is the highest decision making body of the ANC between conferences. Among its most critical responsibilities is holding national leaders deployed in government to account. That is not a ceremonial function. It is supposed to be the backbone of internal accountability and political discipline. To allow someone suspended from their ministerial duties due to serious allegations to sit on a body tasked with overseeing ministers is not merely illogical. It is an ethical absurdity.

But this crisis cannot be laid at the feet of the ANC alone. Senzo Mchunu is not a passive victim of circumstance. He is an active participant in the erosion of public trust.

His conduct as Minister, particularly his decision to unilaterally disband the Political Killings Task Team (PKTT) for what is increasingly clearly for dubious reasons, remains one of the most consequential and troubling actions under scrutiny. The PKTT is not a symbolic structure. It is a critical instrument in addressing politically motivated violence, especially in KwaZulu Natal. Its disbandment raised immediate questions about motive, judgment, and consequence. Those questions have not been answered convincingly.

Mchunu’s performance before the Parliamentary Ad Hoc Committee and the Madlanga Commission only deepened those concerns. His testimony was marked by evasiveness, contradiction, and an apparent inability to account coherently for key decisions taken under his authority. This was not the conduct of a leader seeking to clarify the truth. It was the conduct of someone attempting to survive politically.

More damning still is the mounting body of evidence that contradicts Mchunu’s sworn statements. The President himself has deposed to an affidavit that directly challenges Mchunu’s version of events. 

When a sitting President places such scathing evidence on record regarding the conduct of one of his ministers, the implications are profound. This is not a matter of internal party disagreement. It is a constitutional moment.

In any political culture that takes accountability seriously, that affidavit alone would have triggered a resignation. Not because guilt has been proven, but because the integrity of the office demands it. When you are entrusted with executive authority, and the Head of State publicly contradicts your sworn evidence, the honourable course of action is to step aside fully and without equivocation.

But not Senzo Mchunu.

Instead of demonstrating contrition or restraint, he embarked on a national tour of so called prayer events, a spectacle that blurred the line between spiritual reflection and political theatre. At a time when the country needed clarity, accountability, and humility, South Africans were offered symbolism and deflection. Prayer, in this context, became a shield against scrutiny rather than a moment of introspection.

Even now, Mchunu clings to power. He officially remains in Cabinet. He returns to the ANC NEC. He positions himself not as a leader under serious ethical cloud, but as a wronged figure entitled to resume business as usual. This is not resilience. It is blind political ambition.

Leadership demands more than survival. It demands sacrifice. It demands the ability to place the interests of the people and the organisation above personal advancement. Mchunu has repeatedly failed this test.

The ANC’s defenders will argue that due process must be respected. That is true. But due process is not incompatible with ethical leadership. In fact, the two should reinforce each other. Stepping aside from positions of power while serious allegations are investigated strengthens institutions. Clinging to them corrodes public confidence.

The deeper problem is that the ANC appears unable, or unwilling, to read the room. Electoral losses, declining voter turnout, and growing public cynicism are not abstract trends. They are warnings. South Africans are not apathetic. They are disillusioned. They are tired of being told that technical compliance should satisfy moral outrage.

If the ANC is serious about renewal, it must start where it hurts most, with its leaders. That means holding them to standards higher than the bare minimum of the rulebook. It means recognising that credibility, once lost, can only be rebuilt through visible, painful, and principled action.

Allowing Senzo Mchunu to return to the NEC under these circumstances does the opposite. It signals that the ANC still believes it can manage public perception through procedure rather than principle. It tells South Africans that accountability remains optional for those with sufficient political capital.

South Africa does not need a perfect ANC. It needs an honest one. One that understands that trust is not restored by technicalities, but by courage. Until the ANC and leaders like Senzo Mchunu grasp this, every claim of renewal will ring hollow, and every promise of change will sound increasingly like an insult to the intelligence of the people they seek to govern.

(Dube is a noted Political Economist, Businessperson, and Social Commentator whose insights are regularly featured on Ukhozi FM and in various newspapers. For further reading and perspectives, visit: http://www.ncodube.blog)