Mr President, step up and lead

So on the 20th anniversary of one of the greatest weeks in our entire history as a nation, what is South Africa talking about? What may have transpired from Pres Zuma’s crotch area.

A lot has been said, shouted, defended and alleged, but as things stand now, here is what we know:

1. There is a child out there whose birth certificate purports that she is a member of the First Family.

2. Said child is the result of an extra-marital union between the president and a daughter of a prominent football official.

Here is what we do not know and are speculating on:

1. The nature of the relationship between Pres Zuma and Ms Khoza. Is it a serious altar-bound relationship or an illicit behind-closed-doors affair?

2. Where the president’s current wives stand on this issue. This is linked to the above since if the relationship is a legitimate one then by the very customs Pres Zuma proclaims to uphold, they have to give their consent for it to proceed to the matrimonial stage.

3. Where Ms Khoza’s family stands. Reports suggest that “sources” indicate the child’s maternal grandfather, one Dr Irvin Khoza, is not at all pleased with the situation. Now anyone who knows anything about the media’s track record when it comes to reporting on Zuma will know well enough how to treat “source accounts”. So far the Khoza’s are yet to comment publicly.

4. Whether the child was planned or was a result of irresponsible sexual behaviour on the part of the parents.

Now looking at the above it is quite simply astounding how people have gone as far as calling for Zuma’s head, lambasting him for setting the country back in the battle against HIV/Aids, sacrificing his name on the altar of what is good and morally sound (whatever that may be) and likewise those who have rushed to defend the president and attack his detractors surely do not have much ground beyond their slavish deference to Zuma.

There is quite simply not enough that has been established and put on the public record for reaction to the news to have gone as far as it has. Especially this week when the national consciousness should be focussed on remembering that fateful week when ex-president De Klerk and his supporters took the first major public steps towards the establishment of the democracy we so love and jealously defend. We should be talking about the state of the nation address and what it holds for our immediate future, how our government plans to tackle the challenges facing our nation, not who did what with whose daughter.

What should be asked and required firmly of the president is for him to understand that as head of state and government, his personal life will not be as private as he would like it to be. People are entitled, I feel, to a large, if not pervasive degree, access to news and information on what he does outside his office. It is important for our trust in the man steering our nation’s future. He also needs to realise that his conduct has a bearing on not only himself and his family but the feeling and mood of the nation as a whole. Whatever he may have gotten away with as a private citizen the same does not necessarily apply now, for good reason too.

Zuma should take the initiative and address the nation on this matter. Nothing but open disclosure will set the nation at ease. If he is in a meaningful relationship then this is nothing to hide. We as the people who will fund at least part of his family’s upkeep have a right to know. It would also shove healthy-sized portions of humble pie down the throats of his detractors. If it is otherwise he needs to apologise for this indiscretion and will have to live up to the standards his office requires of him.

Zuma’s personal life should not have a bearing on how we view him as a leader. Berlusconi and Clinton have proved that, but as long as he allows speculation to grow by his (in)actions that is exactly what will transpire.

South Africa deserves better than that.

Whatever the situation, South Africa will not be served positively by speculation and sensationalism driven by and designed to support narrow personal prejudices on both sides of the debate.