By Bheki Mngomezulu

On June 30, 2024, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that eleven political parties had joined the multiparty coalition, which he called the ‘Government of National Unity (GNU).’

The United Africans Transformation (UAT) party pulled out of that coalition after the announcement of the Seventh Administration Cabinet which excluded them. This left the number sitting at ten parties.

Given its forty percent performance or 159 seats in the national government after the May general election, the ANC became the majority party. The Democratic Alliance (DA) came second with 87 seats.

What is noticeable is thatC Understandably, Zille states that she is mandated by her party to represent its interests.

Firstly, Zille has constantly reminded the ANC that it did not win the election. As such, it could not make unilateral decisions on who else should join the coalition without consulting the DA and other political parties. In principle, she was right. However, the irony is that the DA also took unilateral decisions to challenge the ANC without consulting other coalition parties.

Secondly, Zille made huge demands for Ministerial positions in the multiparty coalition government which would have left other coalition partners only eating the crumbles after the ANC and the DA had taken all key ministries.

Thirdly, since the multiparty coalition government has started working there have been instances where the ‘DA Ministers’ language has been in the public domain. Although the DA is not solely responsible for this perception, the reality is that the language portrays the DA as the most important coalition partner of all other parties except for the ANC. This is not how multiparty coalitions work.

When the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Bill landed on President Ramaphosa’s desk to sign into law, the DA threatened to pull out of the coalition if that were to happen. In so doing, it did not consult other political parties.

Eventually, the Bill was signed into law. To accommodate the DA’s concerns following an urgent meeting between Ramaphosa and Steenhuisen, certain clauses were left out so that there could be further consultation for three months. When Siviwe Gwarube did not attend the signing ceremony in her capacity as Minister of Basic Education, there was a call for her resignation – a call she did not accede to.

While all these developments are significant in painting a broader picture of how the DA perceives the coalition government, the DA is also using loopholes in the coalition agreement to push its political agenda.

Initially, the coalition agreement was focused on the national sphere of government. Even when IFP leader Velenkosini Hlabisa addressed a media briefing on this issue he stated that the IFP’s agreement with the ANC and the DA at the national level had no bearing at the provincial level.

But the confusion in the coalition agreement which is the loophole that the DA’s Helen Zille is using can be traced back to the address by Hlabisa. In the same address, towards the end, Hlabisa stated that as the IFP they had already proposed the name of Thami Ntuli to be KZN’s Premier candidate. Importantly, he went on to announce that both the ANC and the DA had agreed.

Such a statement created confusion about the nature of the coalition agreement. Was it going to cascade down to the provincial and local spheres? It was this confusion that led to NFP’s Ivan Barnes crying foul that he did not replace Thulasizwe Buthelezi as Mayor of Zululand when the latter moved to the KZN provincial legislature.

In response, Hlabisa emphatically said that the IFP’s agreement with the NFP did not include the local sphere of government. Indeed, IFP’s Councillor Khumalo was elected unopposed to replace Buthelezi.

The point above bears relevance to what has recently happened in Tshwane where Cilliers Brink was removed from his position as Mayor when 120 councillors voted in favour of his removal with 87 councillors voting against this decision. Only one councillor abstained.

Following this incident, Zille warned that the ANC “must ensure that Brink returns" to his position as the Mayor of Tshwane to avert a situation where the DA might react.

This threat triggers the following questions:

Was the ANC solely responsible for Brink’s removal?
Did the coalition agreement include the local sphere of government?
Did the ANC and the DA have a secret or special deal outside of the one signed with other coalition partners?
If not, what makes the DA claim special treatment in this coalition agreement to the extent that it holds the ANC to ransom?

While all these questions are critical in the broader scheme of things, they lead to even more important questions about the game that Zille is playing including:

Is she testing the strength of the ANC as an organisation?
Is she testing Ramaphosa’s leadership prowess and trying to see how he will respond?
Above all, is Zille clandestinely testing the ANC to see if it can buy into the idea of forging relations with ‘like-minded’ political parties such as the EFF, MKP and PAC?

These questions are critical and require answers ahead of the 2026 Local Government Election and the 2029 general election. Some of the decisions political parties make now will have a direct impact on the outcome of these elections.

Ramaphosa and the ANC have two options.

The first is to take a firm stance on how to deal with the DA’s constant threats to save the coalition government.
Secondly, it must bring together all coalition partners and explain the nature of the coalition agreement and whether it includes all government spheres or not.

The longer it takes to address these issues, the more the DA will threaten the ANC.

* Prof Bheki Mngomezulu is 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