The Government of National Unity may have embarrassed itself over the slight alteration its trajectory has taken. Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber who is a member of the Democratic Alliance has gone against the office of the presidency and the Department of International Relations and Cooperation. With out conducting prior consultation with the relevant bodies or authorities Schreiber signed an agreement giving visa- free access to Ukrainian holders of diplomatic, official and service passports, and vice versa. This was according to Schreiber.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) has brazenly thrown down the gauntlet, openly challenging the sovereignty of South Africa and the authority of its Head of State. In the wake of the 16th BRICS Summit, Leon Schreiber, a DA minister responsible for oversight of the Department of Home Affairs, unilaterally signed and publicly announced visa-free access for Ukrainian diplomatic, official, and service passport holders. He did this without consulting the Department of International Relations and Cooperation or the Office of the President. This flagrant disregard for governmental protocols is a direct affront to our nation’s foreign policy stance. The DA’s opposition to the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Bill was, in retrospect, a warning shot.
The DA is certainly not behaving like a partner in the GNU and its theatrics are disrespectful of the partnership it has entered into with the African National Congress (ANC). The recent decision by Schreiber was done in the full knowledge that it undermined the authority of the president. Schreiber had acted without proper consultation. It was disrespectful of Ramaphosa as President and Schreiber’s de jure boss. Schreiber was clearly acting on the orders of DA leader Steenhuisen. Their act to have the home affairs department issue Visa-free access for Ukrainian passport holders serving in what ever capacity was meant to embarrass and annoy President Ramaphosa. For this humiliation the president could dismiss Schreiber and Steenhuisen from their positions in the cabinet.
When Minister of Basic Education Siviwe Gwarube boycotted its signing ceremony in September this year, the party’s defiance of government reforms was laid bare. The BELA Bill aims to centralise school policies, regulate home schooling, lower the starting school age, and ban corporal punishment, promoting inclusivity. Gwarube’s absence was a clear stand against the bill’s intent to centralise certain powers within the Department of Basic Education and promote inclusivity. Framing the bill as an infringement on provincial rights, the DA positioned itself as a defender of decentralised authority. This boycott marked the DA’s strategic effort to challenge the ANC-led government’s authority, positioning itself with conservative interests and setting a tone of resistance to transformative policies.
The DA may have been worried about the centralization of authority over directing schools in the nation education department. This could lead to lapses in in how schools are run as well as undermine the relationship between the department and the schools’ governing bodies. The DA should have raised its concerns with in the coalition rather than just boycott the President’s signing ceremony. The DA does have a point about the centralization of power away from the provincial administrations to the national government. This could lead to an abuse of power by the government. The DA may have aligned itself with conservative interests but it was done so with reason. Consultation and communication are the key.
A controversial agreement to grant Ukrainian diplomats visa-free access to South Africa has sparked outrage within political circles. South Africa’s Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber, who is from a different party to the president, announced the deal on Sunday, terming Ukraine a “valued ally”. “I have signed an historic agreement granting visa-free access to our country for Ukrainian holders of diplomatic, official and service passports – and vice versa,” Schreiber posted on X. The minister defended the decision, highlighting Ukraine’s support of South Africa during its struggle against apartheid. But the presidency hit back and said that Schreiber’s announcement was premature since he had no authorisation from the president. “It is unclear how the minister can announce the signature of an international agreement without prior formal authorisation to do so,” Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya responded on X.
Both Schreiber (education) and Steenhuisen (agriculture) should be dismissed from their respective portfolios. If Steenhuisen should withdraw from the coalition then the president can threaten to dissolve parliament and call for new elections or make an appeal to Umkhonto We Sizwe (MK) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) to form a new coalition. This could be used as a threat to the DA. A threat to have them fall back into line. But to do so Ramaphosa will have to be assertive and firm. Ramaphosa will no doubt have the executive order by Schreiber annulled as he did not approve of it. The undiplomatic decision by Schreiber and his unofficial boss Steenhuisen was a deliberate attempt to undermine President Ramaphosa’s authority. It was not only disrespectful but also akin to a coup. Regardless of the DA’s good intentions they have also caused a huge diplomatic embarrassment for the Government of National Unity.
It is now up to the President alone to determine what action needs to be taken.
Article written by:
Yacoob Cassim
Journalist at Radio Al Ansaar
