Why are the gloves off on Schabir?
Jeremy Gordin: President Jacob Zuma needs to watch out. The recent brouhaha surrounding Schabir Shaik, his medical parole and his short "re-arrest" is not merely a new addition to our national comedy routines in the tradition of the youth league's Julius Malema and cabinet spokesman Jimmy Manyi.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not merely another opportunity for opposition spokesmen and others to howl like jackals on steroids at Zuma and the ANC, and for members of the public to grin knowingly at one another and say, "Hmm, see how easy it is when you know the right people."
Nor is it just another chance for members of the public, like you and me, to cluck disapprovingly, "Look at how Shaik behaves and look at what he gets away with. The country has clearly gone to the dogs."
In short, the Shaik issue is not simply a laughing matter.
There is a back story to this business - and it has the potential to cause a gigantic political tragedy or bring Zuma his just deserts, depending on where you stand on Zuma and the ANC.
Let's begin by asking this: why, after treating Shaik with kid gloves for a long time, did officials of the Department of Correctional Services suddenly pounce and, without due process, arrange his "re-arrest"? Since when has an article in the Sunday Times been tantamount to an arrest warrant?
Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, the Minister of Correctional Services, is a Mbeki-era survivor and did not do enormously well in her previous portfolio. She knows that she needs to be in Zuma's good books. Mapisa-Nqakula would never in a thousand Sundays have had Shaik hauled in, or have said the sort of things she did, without first talking to the boss or his closest handlangers .
Zuma knew perfectly well that Shaik was going to be zapped for behaving badly - and he let it happen.
Why?
This question takes us to our back story and Shaik's trial in 2004/5.
He was found guilty of fraud and corruption, with Judge Hilary Squires finding "overwhelming" evidence of a corrupt relationship between him and Zuma.
What were Moe and Yunis Shaik, Ranjeni Munusamy and various other people doing at and around Shaik's trial? They were there to support and advise Shaik , of course. But they were mainly there to see that there was no fallout - or as little fallout as possible - that would contaminate Zuma, who at the time was their presidential hopeful .
Moe and Yunis (and Chippy) had been devoted to the struggle (all were tortured under the apartheid regime) and loyal to the ANC and, given that Mbeki had foolishly pushed them away, to Zuma.
They knew that Schabir knew - as did they - a great deal about too many things and that an understanding had to be reached. And so, when Schabir's appeals had been lost, Schabir was asked, or told, or cajoled to "take the pain".
He was, in the interests of the greater good (Zuma and the ANC), to zip his lip and take the fall, and Zuma would take care of him whenever he could. There is every reason to believe that Zuma knew about this understanding.
As it turned out, Schabir's mind and body seemed to have acted on his own behalf.
In the past two years, I have been doing a job involving working in jails, and it is no surprise whatsoever to me that Schabir was completely terrified - and that, therefore, his blood pressure went wildly out of control. Why people find this surprising, I don't understand.
Now, while I am not suggesting that Zuma actually picked up the telephone or visited certain people - because I don't know for sure if he did - what I do suggest is that everyone who dealt with Shaik and his parole knew perfectly well whose "friend" he was. The presence of Zuma was never far away. And Shaik was medically paroled.
Then another understanding was reached - by the family, on the one hand, and Zuma, on the other: Shaik must relax, sit quietly and, in due course, he would be pardoned.
But Shaik has not been pardoned. Why this is so could be for many reasons. One is that Zuma often makes promises - or other people think he has made a promise - that he can't honour or can't be bothered to honour.
Zuma is often the beneficiary of goodwill and "good" deeds from others that he does not repay. He is what some people would call a "taker". It's the way he is. It's the way many people are; they think they are owed.
Shaik is doubtless an angry and bitter man. Most of the things he used to have and enjoy - his lifestyle, the cars, the clothes and the koi - are gone. He's ill. Why? For whom did he take the blame? His wife has left the family home with their young son. His brothers don't talk to him much, if at all, at the moment.
And although the two recent incidents involving him might not have taken place in exactly the way they have been reported, it does seem that he is spinning out of control. If he is left to stew, it is only a matter of time before he stops hitting people and starts talking about what he didn't say on the witness stand.
His brothers - loyal to the cause though they might be - can't be very happy either. The family fabric has been ripped apart, and the only way it can be put together, to some extent, is if promises are kept.
They must also be asking why Zuma allowed Shaik to be "re-arrested" in the way he was a few days ago. Fact is, these people know where the bodies are buried - so to speak - and Zuma really cannot afford more skeletons falling out of his bulging closet.
If I were the president, I'd clear things as best I could with my old friends and not worry so much about the Gupta family and other newcomers to the honey pot.
