South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal ruled on Monday that the ex-president Jacob Zuma's medical release on parole was "unlawful" and he should return to prison to finish his sentence for contempt of court.

South African court rules ex-President Zuma’s medical parole was unlawful

An another day of South African President Ramaphosa's testimony against Jacob Zuma. Ramaphosa continues to make explosive revelations. He told to the corruption and enquiry committee that the ruling African National Congress was blindsided and that the government failed to detect corruption on time.

South Africa: Day 2 of Ramaphosa's testimony against his predecessor

The corruption trial of former South African President Jacob Zuma was postponed on Tuesday after he was hospitalized last week. The matter was postponed to the 9th of September. The case has been carrying on for years and suffered a string of holdups.

South African President Jacob Zuma's corruption trial gets postponed

The Zuma years are over. He kept fighting almost to the very end. But South Africa&rsquo;s scandal-ridden President Jacob Zuma finally accepted the inevitability of his political fate late last night when he resigned with immediate effect. By doing so he cut short his second and final term as president of Africa&rsquo;s largest economy with over a year still to run.

Even then he toyed with his audience. In a 30-minute address that began close to 10.30pm local time, Zuma appeared to be veering towards requiring the ruling African National Congress (ANC) to use its majority in parliament to remove him by way of a no confidence motion.

With an ardent defence of the constitution &ndash; ironic given the many findings of constitutional transgression made by the courts in recent years against him &ndash; Zuma argued that the most appropriate way for a president to be removed from office would be by one of the two constitutional mechanisms &ndash; a vote of no confidence pursuant to section 102 or impeachment under section 89 &ndash; rather than by his party.

But the implication that to bend to his party&rsquo;s will would represent a subjugation of the will of the people was a typical example of Zuma&rsquo;s misrepresentation or misunderstanding of South Africa&rsquo;s system of government. While the head of government is the president, the system is essentially a parliamentary one, The president is elected by parliament and not directly by the electorate.

So this was not regime change as Zuma implied. It was a palace coup, very similar to the one Zuma had overseen when Thabo Mbeki was removed from office ten years ago in September 2008.

Last throw of the dice

At the start of a dramatic week in South African politics, on Monday the ANC&rsquo;s National Executive Committee concluded a marathon 13-hour meeting by deciding that Zuma should be &ldquo;recalled&rdquo; and replaced by Cyril Ramaphosa. Ramaphosa was Zuma&rsquo;s deputy in government after winning a closely-contested race to succeed him as ANC president at the party&rsquo;s five-yearly national elective conference in December.

A former trade union leader and, later a successful businessman, Ramaphosa won on a &lsquo;change&rsquo; agenda. He promised to end the culture of impunity that has been the hallmark of the Zuma years and to arrest the self-enrichment project of &ldquo;state capture&rdquo;. This has seen key state institutions, such as the SA Revenue Service and PRASA, hollowed out, causing great harm to the interests of millions of the most vulnerable citizens.

Earlier in the day Zuma had waged war against his own party when in an exclusive interview with the South African Broadcasting Corporation he defied the ANC&rsquo;s leadership, claiming that he had not done anything wrong. He also claimed that the party had failed to specify the reason for its decision to recall him.

At one point in the interview Zuma appeared to be threatening instability in the organisation that he has served his whole life &ndash; a last roll of the dice for a fearless politician for whom the usual rules of political engagement never seemed to apply.

But Ramaphosa did not blink and preparations for the vote of no confidence continued. Zuma calculated that the game was up and fell, finally, on his sword.

Under the country&rsquo;s constitution, the deputy president of the country Ramaphosa takes over as interim president immediately. The National Assembly is nevertheless likely to be convened shortly to elect a new president. This will enable Ramaphosa to deliver the State of the Nation Address that was postponed last week.

Victory for the rule of law

Given the history and context of post-colonial Africa in which numerous heads of state have clung onto power for decades, yesterday&rsquo;s turn of events could be seen as a victory for South Africa&rsquo;s democracy. It has proved to be resilient in the face of the Zuma-enabled project of state capture.

The rule of law and an independent judiciary has held firm despite the pressures of an unrelenting line of politically-charged cases. Along with opposition parties, civil society organisations, such as Section 27 and the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, have used the constitution to challenge Zuma.

Now Zuma, along with Gupta family and many others &ndash; including several members of the current cabinet &ndash; must face the prospect of being held to account. The process is already underway. Yesterday began with the startling news that one of the Gupta brothers had been arrested and the family&rsquo;s compound in Saxonwold, Johannesburg had been searched.

And a judicial inquiry into the involvement of the Guptas in state capture will soon commence. This will include their relationship to both cabinet ministers and the leadership of certain key state owned enterprises, such as beleaguered energy utility Eskom.

And one of Ramaphosa&rsquo;s first appointments will be a new national director of public prosecutions. The courts have already ruled that they must proceed with the prosecution of the 783 corruption charges that were unlawfully dropped against Zuma just before he first became president in April 2009.

Whether Zuma is convicted and imprisoned remains to be seen. But his early ousting from power is a salutary lesson. Those implicated in the corruption that has increasingly undermined investor confidence in South Africa in recent years will be quaking in their boots.

The winds of change are blowing through the corridors of power.

Ramaphosa&rsquo;s big challenges

Having dealt with the unavoidably messy and awkward business of removing a sitting head of state, Ramaphosa can turn to the even bigger and important challenges that face the country. These include a fiscal crunch with tough public expenditure choices to be wrestled with in next week&rsquo;s budget. These include high unemployment and inequality; and rebuilding integrity in state institutions and agencies.

With Zuma out of the way, Ramaphosa can expedite his pursuit of a socio-economic &ldquo;new deal&rdquo; unencumbered by Zuma&rsquo;s obstructive tendencies and personal interests. These have included a rumoured deal with President Vladimir Putin to purchase nuclear power plants from Russia.

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91910/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />Ramaphosa, and South Africa, now have a clear run at addressing the many urgent problems that have hindered economic growth and confidence in recent years. They have given themselves an opportunity to rebuild the lost social compact of the Mandela years. And recover from the draining swamp of Zuma&rsquo;s rule.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/zuma-finally-falls-on-his-sword-but-not-before-threatening-to-take-the-house-down-with-him-91910" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp; &nbsp;

&nbsp;

Now Zuma, along with Gupta family and many others – including several members of the current cabinet – must face the prospect of being held to account.

The Zuma years are over. He kept fighting almost to the very end. But South Africa’s scandal-ridden President Jacob Zuma finally accepted the inevitability of his political fate late last night when he resigned with immediate effect. By doing so he cut short his second and final term as president of Africa’s largest economy with over a year still to run. Even then he toyed with his audience. In a 30-minute address that began close to 10.30pm local time, Zuma appeared to be veering towards requiring the ruling African National Congress (ANC) to use its majority in parliament to remove him by way of a no confidence motion. With an ardent defence of the constitution – ironic given the many findings of constitutional transgression made by the courts in recent years against him – Zuma argued that the most appropriate way for a president to be removed from office would be by one of the two constitutional mechanisms – a vote of no confidence pursuant to section 102 or impeachment under section 89 – rather than by his party. But the implication that to bend to his party’s will would represent a subjugation of the will of the people was a typical example of Zuma’s misrepresentation or misunderstanding of South Africa’s system of government. While the head of government is the president, the system is essentially a parliamentary one, The president is elected by parliament and not directly by the electorate. So this was not regime change as Zuma implied. It was a palace coup, very similar to the one Zuma had overseen when Thabo Mbeki was removed from office ten years ago in September 2008. Last throw of the dice At the start of a dramatic week in South African politics, on Monday the ANC’s National Executive Committee concluded a marathon 13-hour meeting by deciding that Zuma should be “recalled” and replaced by Cyril Ramaphosa. Ramaphosa was Zuma’s deputy in government after winning a closely-contested race to succeed him as ANC president at the party’s five-yearly national elective conference in December. A former trade union leader and, later a successful businessman, Ramaphosa won on a ‘change’ agenda. He promised to end the culture of impunity that has been the hallmark of the Zuma years and to arrest the self-enrichment project of “state capture”. This has seen key state institutions, such as the SA Revenue Service and PRASA, hollowed out, causing great harm to the interests of millions of the most vulnerable citizens. Earlier in the day Zuma had waged war against his own party when in an exclusive interview with the South African Broadcasting Corporation he defied the ANC’s leadership, claiming that he had not done anything wrong. He also claimed that the party had failed to specify the reason for its decision to recall him. At one point in the interview Zuma appeared to be threatening instability in the organisation that he has served his whole life – a last roll of the dice for a fearless politician for whom the usual rules of political engagement never seemed to apply. But Ramaphosa did not blink and preparations for the vote of no confidence continued. Zuma calculated that the game was up and fell, finally, on his sword. Under the country’s constitution, the deputy president of the country Ramaphosa takes over as interim president immediately. The National Assembly is nevertheless likely to be convened shortly to elect a new president. This will enable Ramaphosa to deliver the State of the Nation Address that was postponed last week. Victory for the rule of law Given the history and context of post-colonial Africa in which numerous heads of state have clung onto power for decades, yesterday’s turn of events could be seen as a victory for South Africa’s democracy. It has proved to be resilient in the face of the Zuma-enabled project of state capture. The rule of law and an independent judiciary has held firm despite the pressures of an unrelenting line of politically-charged cases. Along with opposition parties, civil society organisations, such as Section 27 and the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, have used the constitution to challenge Zuma. Now Zuma, along with Gupta family and many others – including several members of the current cabinet – must face the prospect of being held to account. The process is already underway. Yesterday began with the startling news that one of the Gupta brothers had been arrested and the family’s compound in Saxonwold, Johannesburg had been searched. And a judicial inquiry into the involvement of the Guptas in state capture will soon commence. This will include their relationship to both cabinet ministers and the leadership of certain key state owned enterprises, such as beleaguered energy utility Eskom. And one of Ramaphosa’s first appointments will be a new national director of public prosecutions. The courts have already ruled that they must proceed with the prosecution of the 783 corruption charges that were unlawfully dropped against Zuma just before he first became president in April 2009. Whether Zuma is convicted and imprisoned remains to be seen. But his early ousting from power is a salutary lesson. Those implicated in the corruption that has increasingly undermined investor confidence in South Africa in recent years will be quaking in their boots. The winds of change are blowing through the corridors of power. Ramaphosa’s big challenges Having dealt with the unavoidably messy and awkward business of removing a sitting head of state, Ramaphosa can turn to the even bigger and important challenges that face the country. These include a fiscal crunch with tough public expenditure choices to be wrestled with in next week’s budget. These include high unemployment and inequality; and rebuilding integrity in state institutions and agencies. With Zuma out of the way, Ramaphosa can expedite his pursuit of a socio-economic “new deal” unencumbered by Zuma’s obstructive tendencies and personal interests. These have included a rumoured deal with President Vladimir Putin to purchase nuclear power plants from Russia. Ramaphosa, and South Africa, now have a clear run at addressing the many urgent problems that have hindered economic growth and confidence in recent years. They have given themselves an opportunity to rebuild the lost social compact of the Mandela years. And recover from the draining swamp of Zuma’s rule. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: South Africa sees the end of President Jacob Zuma and Gupta brothers' tyranny

Heavily armed South African police raided the luxury home of the Gupta family on Wednesday as part of a probe into allegations the three brothers had corrupt links with President Jacob Zuma, who has been <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/south-africas-anc-confirms-recall-of-zuma-from-presidency-32764" target="_blank">ordered by the ruling ANC to quit</a> as head of state.

The raid marks a dramatic escalation in the pressure on Zuma and the political faction around him accused of milking state resources for their own ends. However, it remains unclear whether the 75-year-old will throw in the towel, or dig in deeper.

The early morning raid, which the police&#39;s elite Hawks unit said resulted in three arrests, took place amid reports Zuma was preparing to tell South Africa he was stepping down after nine years in office dogged by scandal and economic stagnation.

The SABC, South Africa&#39;s state broadcaster, said a Gupta family member was among those detained.

Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba said Zuma would speak at 0800 GMT and satellite trucks were in position at Pretoria&#39;s Union Buildings, the seat of government. However, Zuma&#39;s office denied there had been any &quot;official communication&quot; of an impending address.

Adding to the confusion, a copy of an email, purportedly from deputy presidential communications director Shadi Baloyi, circulated on Twitter telling Pretoria police that plans for a &quot;special media briefing&quot; by Zuma at 0800 GMT at the Union Buildings had been cancelled.

&quot;Kindly ignore my earlier request, as the briefing will not take place tomorrow,&quot; Baloyi wrote. Reuters was unable to confirm the email&#39;s authenticity and Baloyi did not answer her phone or respond to text messages.

Zuma&#39;s spokesman did not answer his phone.

&#39;Crime scene&#39;

The document was just one of the many dramas gripping Pretoria and Johannesburg, South Africa&#39;s political and commercial capitals, as the net closed in on Zuma and his allies.

Shortly after dawn, a dozen officers from the elite Hawks police unit sealed off a street leading to the Gupta mansion in Johannesburg&#39;s upscale Saxonwold suburb. One officer blocked access to Reuters, saying: &quot;This is a crime scene.&quot;

Minutes later, an unmarked police van left the compound as residents applauded police officers and hurled abuse at security guards for the Guptas, who have been accused by South Africa&#39;s top anti-corruption watchdog of influence-peddling and swaying the appointment of cabinet ministers.

&quot;Finally something is being done about it. These guys must get out of our country. They must leave us alone. They have done enough damage,&quot; said Tessa Turvey, head of the local residents&#39; association, standing outside the compound&#39;s iron gates.

Police also raided the Guptas&#39; Oakbay holding company in Johannesburg&#39;s Sandton financial district, according to a security guard outside the building.

On Tuesday, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) ordered Zuma to step down as president of the country, giving him no firm deadline but saying the party was sure he would comply and &quot;respond&quot; on Wednesday.

Zuma and the Guptas - a family of wealthy Indian-born businessmen - deny any wrongdoing.

A lawyer for the Gupta family said he could not comment on the raid because he had yet to see the search warrant.

Hawks spokesman Hangwani Mulaudzi said the raid was part of a probe into influence-peddling allegations. The allegations are also the subject of a judicial inquiry on wider corruption involving the Guptas, dubbed &quot;state capture&quot; in local media.

&quot;We&#39;re not playing around in terms of making sure that those who are responsible in the so-called state capture, they take responsibility for it,&quot; Mulaudzi said.

He declined to give details of what was seized or if the business premises of the Guptas, whose commercial empire stretches from mining to media, would also be raided.

&#39;Disciplined member&#39;

Signs of law enforcement mobilising against the Guptas - and by association Zuma - caused the rand to strengthen 0.5 percent against the dollar. The currency has tended to gain ground on any sign of Zuma&#39;s political departure approaching.

Zuma&#39;s silence has fuelled speculation of an increasingly desperate power struggle behind the scenes with deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, whose election to the head of ANC in December marked the beginning of the end of Zuma&#39;s tenure.

Besides his controversial relationship with the Guptas, who were born in India but moved to South Africa in the early 1990s, Zuma has 783 counts of corruption outstanding against him relating to a $2.5 billion state arms deal in the late 1990s.

Besides the pressure from the ANC, Zuma is facing a no-confidence motion in parliament brought by the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters. That motion is set for Feb. 22.

The ANC could throw its weight behind such a vote if Zuma, who has survived several no-confidence motions in the past, refused to heed its orders to resign. The entire Cabinet would have to step down if such a vote went through.

The Guptas have been accused by South Africa's top anti-corruption watchdog of influence-peddling and swaying the appointment of cabinet ministers

Heavily armed South African police raided the luxury home of the Gupta family on Wednesday as part of a probe into allegations the three brothers had corrupt links with President Jacob Zuma, who has been ordered by the ruling ANC to quit as head of state. The raid marks a dramatic escalation in the pressure on Zuma and the political faction around him accused of milking state resources for their own ends. However, it remains unclear whether the 75-year-old will throw in the towel, or dig in deeper. The early morning raid, which the police's elite Hawks unit said resulted in three arrests, took place amid reports Zuma was preparing to tell South Africa he was stepping down after nine years in office dogged by scandal and economic stagnation. The SABC, South Africa's state broadcaster, said a Gupta family member was among those detained. Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba said Zuma would speak at 0800 GMT and satellite trucks were in position at Pretoria's Union Buildings, the seat of government. However, Zuma's office denied there had been any "official communication" of an impending address. Adding to the confusion, a copy of an email, purportedly from deputy presidential communications director Shadi Baloyi, circulated on Twitter telling Pretoria police that plans for a "special media briefing" by Zuma at 0800 GMT at the Union Buildings had been cancelled. "Kindly ignore my earlier request, as the briefing will not take place tomorrow," Baloyi wrote. Reuters was unable to confirm the email's authenticity and Baloyi did not answer her phone or respond to text messages. Zuma's spokesman did not answer his phone. 'Crime scene' The document was just one of the many dramas gripping Pretoria and Johannesburg, South Africa's political and commercial capitals, as the net closed in on Zuma and his allies. Shortly after dawn, a dozen officers from the elite Hawks police unit sealed off a street leading to the Gupta mansion in Johannesburg's upscale Saxonwold suburb. One officer blocked access to Reuters, saying: "This is a crime scene." Minutes later, an unmarked police van left the compound as residents applauded police officers and hurled abuse at security guards for the Guptas, who have been accused by South Africa's top anti-corruption watchdog of influence-peddling and swaying the appointment of cabinet ministers. "Finally something is being done about it. These guys must get out of our country. They must leave us alone. They have done enough damage," said Tessa Turvey, head of the local residents' association, standing outside the compound's iron gates. Police also raided the Guptas' Oakbay holding company in Johannesburg's Sandton financial district, according to a security guard outside the building. On Tuesday, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) ordered Zuma to step down as president of the country, giving him no firm deadline but saying the party was sure he would comply and "respond" on Wednesday. Zuma and the Guptas - a family of wealthy Indian-born businessmen - deny any wrongdoing. A lawyer for the Gupta family said he could not comment on the raid because he had yet to see the search warrant. Hawks spokesman Hangwani Mulaudzi said the raid was part of a probe into influence-peddling allegations. The allegations are also the subject of a judicial inquiry on wider corruption involving the Guptas, dubbed "state capture" in local media. "We're not playing around in terms of making sure that those who are responsible in the so-called state capture, they take responsibility for it," Mulaudzi said. He declined to give details of what was seized or if the business premises of the Guptas, whose commercial empire stretches from mining to media, would also be raided. 'Disciplined member' Signs of law enforcement mobilising against the Guptas - and by association Zuma - caused the rand to strengthen 0.5 percent against the dollar. The currency has tended to gain ground on any sign of Zuma's political departure approaching. Zuma's silence has fuelled speculation of an increasingly desperate power struggle behind the scenes with deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, whose election to the head of ANC in December marked the beginning of the end of Zuma's tenure. Besides his controversial relationship with the Guptas, who were born in India but moved to South Africa in the early 1990s, Zuma has 783 counts of corruption outstanding against him relating to a $2.5 billion state arms deal in the late 1990s. Besides the pressure from the ANC, Zuma is facing a no-confidence motion in parliament brought by the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters. That motion is set for Feb. 22. The ANC could throw its weight behind such a vote if Zuma, who has survived several no-confidence motions in the past, refused to heed its orders to resign. The entire Cabinet would have to step down if such a vote went through.

South African police raid home of Guptas, friends of President Zuma

Cyril <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Ramaphosa" pg="AS1_InlineMedia#AS1_https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/ramaphosa-trade-unionist-tycoon-and-s-africas-next-president/articleshow/62904930.cms~Ramaphosa-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Ramaphosa">Ramaphosa</a>&#39;s long and eventful career has taken him from trade union activist to multi-millionaire &mdash; and now within a heartbeat of the South African presidency.

After <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/South-Africa" pg="AS1_InlineMedia#AS1_https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/ramaphosa-trade-unionist-tycoon-and-s-africas-next-president/articleshow/62904930.cms~South Africa-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/South-Africa">South Africa</a> dismantled apartheid, Ramaphosa saw his hopes for the country&#39;s top job apparently dashed. 
 
True to his pragmatic character, he opted instead for life in business &mdash; a move that brought him spectacular wealth. 
 
But Tuesday&#39;s announcement that the ruling African National Congress (ANC) had ordered that President <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Jacob-Zuma" pg="AS1_InlineMedia#AS1_https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/ramaphosa-trade-unionist-tycoon-and-s-africas-next-president/articleshow/62904930.cms~Jacob Zuma-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Jacob-Zuma">Jacob Zuma</a> is recalled from the presidency put Ramaphosa in pole position to succeed him. 
 
It was after Ramaphosa failed to clinch the ANC nomination to succeed president Nelson Mandela in 1999 that he swapped politics for a foray into a business that made him one of the wealthiest people in Africa. 
 
The 65-year-old&#39;s impressive rise to eventually lead the ANC following its December conference would have come as no surprise to Mandela. 
 
Mandela once described Ramaphosa as one of the most gifted leaders of the &quot;new generation&quot; &mdash; the young campaigners who rose in the 1970s, filling the void left by their jailed elders.

During his business career, Ramaphosa held stakes in McDonald&#39;s and Coca-Cola&#39;s local ventures and made millions in deals that required investors to partner with non-white shareholders. 
 
He became one of the richest men on the continent &mdash; reaching number 42 on the Forbes list of Africa&#39;s wealthiest people in 2015 with a net worth of $450 million (383 million euros). 
 
Out of politics for a decade, Ramaphosa returned to the fray in 2012 when he was elected to the ANC&#39;s number two post. 
 
He became deputy president of the nation in 2014, but has had to tread a careful line. He has both served Zuma &mdash; tarred by accusations of corruption and incompetence &mdash; and also delivered occasional, cautious criticism of his political master. 
 
His ambivalence has led to criticism. 
 
Mmusi Maimane, leader of the main opposition Democratic Alliance party, accused Ramaphosa of being &quot;at best a silent deputy president, and at worst a complicit one&quot;. 
 
Born on November 17, 1952 in Soweto township west of Johannesburg &mdash; a centre of the anti-apartheid struggle &mdash; Ramaphosa became involved with student activism while studying law in the 1970s. 
 
He was arrested in 1974 and spent 11 months in solitary confinement.

After studying, he turned to trade unionism &mdash; one of the few legal ways of protesting against the white-minority regime. 
 
He founded the <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/National-Union-of-Mineworkers" pg="AS1_InlineMedia#AS1_https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/ramaphosa-trade-unionist-tycoon-and-s-africas-next-president/articleshow/62904930.cms~National Union of Mineworkers-https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/National-Union-of-Mineworkers">National Union of Mineworkers</a> (NUM) in 1982 which grew to have 300,000 members and led massive mine strikes in 1987 that shook the foundations of white rule. 
 
When Mandela was released in 1990 after 27 years in prison for opposing apartheid, Ramaphosa was a key part of the taskforce that led the transition to democracy. 
 
Ramaphosa rose to global prominence as the ANC&#39;s lead negotiator, with his contribution seen as one factor in the success of the talks and the resulting peaceful democratic handover. 
 
He then led the group that drew up the country&#39;s world-renowned new constitution. 
 
Ramaphosa &mdash; who is relaxed and low-key at public appearances &mdash; has managed to steer clear of major corruption scandals but his return to politics has not been free from controversy. 
 
His popularity was badly shaken in 2012 when 34 striking mine workers were killed by police at the Marikana platinum mine, operated by London-listed Lonmin, where he was then a non-executive director. 
 
Shortly before the massacre &mdash; the worst police killing since the end of apartheid &mdash; Ramaphosa had called for a crackdown on the strikers, whom he accused of &quot;dastardly criminal&quot; behaviour.

Ramaphosa has four children with his second wife Tshepo Motsepe, a doctor. 
 
He was accused in 2017 of having affairs with several young women, which he denied. 
 
Ramaphosa did admit to an extramarital affair but told local media that he had since disclosed the relationship to his wife. 
 
Some saw the sudden revelations as a smear campaign by associates of President Zuma who backed another candidate at the crunch party conference &mdash; his ex-wife Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma. 
 
The impact of the scandal was short-lived, and Ramaphosa based his campaign on his pledge to rebuild the country&#39;s economy, boost growth and create much-needed jobs. 
 
&quot;Our ability to overcome these challenges has been undermined over the last decade by a failure of leadership and misguided priorities,&quot; he said in a rally speech.

&quot;For the first time since the advent of democracy, there is a real chance that the transformation of our country may suffer significant reverses.&quot; 
 
If, as expected, he becomes president, his opportunity to try to transform the country will finally have arrived. 
 
&quot;Ramaphosa has no association with any of the corruption scandals that have plagued South Africa,&quot; wrote his biographer Ray Hartley in &quot;The Man Who Would Be King&quot;. 
 
&quot;But the years he spent at Zuma&#39;s side, playing the &#39;inside game&#39; suggest he is more comfortable as a powerful insider than as a radical reformer.&quot;

True to his pragmatic character, he opted instead for life in business — a move that brought him spectacular wealth.

Cyril Ramaphosa's long and eventful career has taken him from trade union activist to multi-millionaire — and now within a heartbeat of the South African presidency. After South Africa dismantled apartheid, Ramaphosa saw his hopes for the country's top job apparently dashed. True to his pragmatic character, he opted instead for life in business — a move that brought him spectacular wealth. But Tuesday's announcement that the ruling African National Congress (ANC) had ordered that President Jacob Zuma is recalled from the presidency put Ramaphosa in pole position to succeed him. It was after Ramaphosa failed to clinch the ANC nomination to succeed president Nelson Mandela in 1999 that he swapped politics for a foray into a business that made him one of the wealthiest people in Africa. The 65-year-old's impressive rise to eventually lead the ANC following its December conference would have come as no surprise to Mandela. Mandela once described Ramaphosa as one of the most gifted leaders of the "new generation" — the young campaigners who rose in the 1970s, filling the void left by their jailed elders. During his business career, Ramaphosa held stakes in McDonald's and Coca-Cola's local ventures and made millions in deals that required investors to partner with non-white shareholders. He became one of the richest men on the continent — reaching number 42 on the Forbes list of Africa's wealthiest people in 2015 with a net worth of $450 million (383 million euros). Out of politics for a decade, Ramaphosa returned to the fray in 2012 when he was elected to the ANC's number two post. He became deputy president of the nation in 2014, but has had to tread a careful line. He has both served Zuma — tarred by accusations of corruption and incompetence — and also delivered occasional, cautious criticism of his political master. His ambivalence has led to criticism. Mmusi Maimane, leader of the main opposition Democratic Alliance party, accused Ramaphosa of being "at best a silent deputy president, and at worst a complicit one". Born on November 17, 1952 in Soweto township west of Johannesburg — a centre of the anti-apartheid struggle — Ramaphosa became involved with student activism while studying law in the 1970s. He was arrested in 1974 and spent 11 months in solitary confinement. After studying, he turned to trade unionism — one of the few legal ways of protesting against the white-minority regime. He founded the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) in 1982 which grew to have 300,000 members and led massive mine strikes in 1987 that shook the foundations of white rule. When Mandela was released in 1990 after 27 years in prison for opposing apartheid, Ramaphosa was a key part of the taskforce that led the transition to democracy. Ramaphosa rose to global prominence as the ANC's lead negotiator, with his contribution seen as one factor in the success of the talks and the resulting peaceful democratic handover. He then led the group that drew up the country's world-renowned new constitution. Ramaphosa — who is relaxed and low-key at public appearances — has managed to steer clear of major corruption scandals but his return to politics has not been free from controversy. His popularity was badly shaken in 2012 when 34 striking mine workers were killed by police at the Marikana platinum mine, operated by London-listed Lonmin, where he was then a non-executive director. Shortly before the massacre — the worst police killing since the end of apartheid — Ramaphosa had called for a crackdown on the strikers, whom he accused of "dastardly criminal" behaviour. Ramaphosa has four children with his second wife Tshepo Motsepe, a doctor. He was accused in 2017 of having affairs with several young women, which he denied. Ramaphosa did admit to an extramarital affair but told local media that he had since disclosed the relationship to his wife. Some saw the sudden revelations as a smear campaign by associates of President Zuma who backed another candidate at the crunch party conference — his ex-wife Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma. The impact of the scandal was short-lived, and Ramaphosa based his campaign on his pledge to rebuild the country's economy, boost growth and create much-needed jobs. "Our ability to overcome these challenges has been undermined over the last decade by a failure of leadership and misguided priorities," he said in a rally speech. "For the first time since the advent of democracy, there is a real chance that the transformation of our country may suffer significant reverses." If, as expected, he becomes president, his opportunity to try to transform the country will finally have arrived. "Ramaphosa has no association with any of the corruption scandals that have plagued South Africa," wrote his biographer Ray Hartley in "The Man Who Would Be King". "But the years he spent at Zuma's side, playing the 'inside game' suggest he is more comfortable as a powerful insider than as a radical reformer."

Ramaphosa: Trade unionist, tycoon and South Africa's next president?

Thousands of delegates from South Africa&#39;s ANC party gathered Saturday for a five-day meeting to elect their new leader in a divisive race seen as a pivotal moment in the country&#39;s post-apartheid history.&nbsp;

The winner will be well placed to be the next president, but the ANC has lost much popularity since Nelson Mandela led it to power in the euphoric 1994 election that marked the end of white-minority rule.&nbsp;Soaring unemployment and government corruption have fuelled frustration among millions of poor black South Africans who face dire housing, inadequate education, and continuing racial inequality.&nbsp;

President Jacob Zuma, whose reign has been marred by graft scandals, will step down as ANC chief but remain as head of state ahead of general elections in 2019.&nbsp;The two front-runners for the party leadership are his ex-wife and former African Union Commission head Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, a wealthy businessman.

The battle could split the ANC and the conference looks set to be acrimonious.&nbsp;ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe on Saturday said some delegates had been disqualified from voting after multiple legal disputes raged in courts for weeks before the meeting.&nbsp;As rival delegates danced and sang songs in support of their chosen candidate, Mantashe said the start of the event had been delayed until 1200 GMT when Zuma would make the opening address.

Dlamini-Zuma, 68, headed the African Union commission until earlier this year and is a former interior, foreign affairs, and health minister.&nbsp;But her critics say she would pursue Zuma&#39;s failing economic and political policies and would be his proxy to protect him from criminal prosecution over graft allegations.&nbsp;

The couple had four children together before divorcing in 1998.

&nbsp;&#39;Afraid of being prosecuted&#39;&nbsp;

Ramaphosa, 65, a former trade union leader, led the historic negotiations in the 1990s to end apartheid before launching a business career that made him one of the country&#39;s wealthiest men.&nbsp;He is often accused of failing to confront Zuma while serving as his deputy since 2014.&nbsp;

&quot;There is so much at stake and the two candidates are very close in the race&quot;, Amanda Gouws, a politics professor at Stellenbosch University, told AFP.&nbsp;Gouws said that the thousands of party delegates could be offered bribes for their votes and that Zuma was lobbying hard for Dlamini-Zuma to emerge victoriously.&nbsp;

&quot;Zuma is very afraid of being prosecuted after he leaves office if Dlamini-Zuma doesn&#39;t win, so he is really trying to make sure she does&quot;, she said.&nbsp;Dlamini-Zuma has strongly denied her campaign had been involved with vote-buying, saying &quot;no leader will be proud of being elected out of money&quot;.&nbsp;With tensions rising, Ramaphosa said the party &quot;should rally behind whoever is elected&quot;.

Tefu Velaphi, a 38-year-old delegate, and building manager, told AFP: &quot;Zuma&#39;s legacy is disastrous. He only cares about himself and his friends. We want them to be arrested.&nbsp;&quot;That lady will protect Zuma&quot;, he said, referring to Dlamini-Zuma.&nbsp;But Matthew Tsepang, one of her supporters, said: &nbsp;&quot;We can not judge a person by her previous life. She can be a former wife but have her independence. She is a capable leader&quot;.

&nbsp;2019 election looms

The ANC is still South Africa&#39;s biggest party by far, but the 54 percent it won in local elections last year was its worst poll result since 1994 -- underlining its sharp recent decline in popularity.&nbsp;Ramaphosa is widely seen as the stronger candidate to lead the party into the 2019 general election.&nbsp;But if he loses the party leadership battle, some experts say the party could split.

Opposition parties the Democratic Alliance and Economic Freedom Fighters are both hoping to exploit the ANC&#39;s woes in the election, with one possible outcome being a coalition government.&nbsp;Other leadership hopefuls include parliament speaker Baleka Mbete, presidency minister Jeff Radebe and Zweli Mkhize, the party treasurer.

The ANC has lost much popularity since Nelson Mandela led it to power in the euphoric 1994 election that marked the end of white-minority rule

Thousands of delegates from South Africa's ANC party gathered Saturday for a five-day meeting to elect their new leader in a divisive race seen as a pivotal moment in the country's post-apartheid history. The winner will be well placed to be the next president, but the ANC has lost much popularity since Nelson Mandela led it to power in the euphoric 1994 election that marked the end of white-minority rule. Soaring unemployment and government corruption have fuelled frustration among millions of poor black South Africans who face dire housing, inadequate education, and continuing racial inequality. President Jacob Zuma, whose reign has been marred by graft scandals, will step down as ANC chief but remain as head of state ahead of general elections in 2019. The two front-runners for the party leadership are his ex-wife and former African Union Commission head Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, a wealthy businessman. The battle could split the ANC and the conference looks set to be acrimonious. ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe on Saturday said some delegates had been disqualified from voting after multiple legal disputes raged in courts for weeks before the meeting. As rival delegates danced and sang songs in support of their chosen candidate, Mantashe said the start of the event had been delayed until 1200 GMT when Zuma would make the opening address. Dlamini-Zuma, 68, headed the African Union commission until earlier this year and is a former interior, foreign affairs, and health minister. But her critics say she would pursue Zuma's failing economic and political policies and would be his proxy to protect him from criminal prosecution over graft allegations. The couple had four children together before divorcing in 1998. 'Afraid of being prosecuted' Ramaphosa, 65, a former trade union leader, led the historic negotiations in the 1990s to end apartheid before launching a business career that made him one of the country's wealthiest men. He is often accused of failing to confront Zuma while serving as his deputy since 2014. "There is so much at stake and the two candidates are very close in the race", Amanda Gouws, a politics professor at Stellenbosch University, told AFP. Gouws said that the thousands of party delegates could be offered bribes for their votes and that Zuma was lobbying hard for Dlamini-Zuma to emerge victoriously. "Zuma is very afraid of being prosecuted after he leaves office if Dlamini-Zuma doesn't win, so he is really trying to make sure she does", she said. Dlamini-Zuma has strongly denied her campaign had been involved with vote-buying, saying "no leader will be proud of being elected out of money". With tensions rising, Ramaphosa said the party "should rally behind whoever is elected". Tefu Velaphi, a 38-year-old delegate, and building manager, told AFP: "Zuma's legacy is disastrous. He only cares about himself and his friends. We want them to be arrested. "That lady will protect Zuma", he said, referring to Dlamini-Zuma. But Matthew Tsepang, one of her supporters, said: "We can not judge a person by her previous life. She can be a former wife but have her independence. She is a capable leader". 2019 election looms The ANC is still South Africa's biggest party by far, but the 54 percent it won in local elections last year was its worst poll result since 1994 -- underlining its sharp recent decline in popularity. Ramaphosa is widely seen as the stronger candidate to lead the party into the 2019 general election. But if he loses the party leadership battle, some experts say the party could split. Opposition parties the Democratic Alliance and Economic Freedom Fighters are both hoping to exploit the ANC's woes in the election, with one possible outcome being a coalition government. Other leadership hopefuls include parliament speaker Baleka Mbete, presidency minister Jeff Radebe and Zweli Mkhize, the party treasurer.

South Africa's troubled ANC meets to elect new leader

Jacob Zuma is a natural born political survivor. Yesterday South Africa&rsquo;s president <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/08/jacob-zuma-survives-no-confidence-vote-south-african-president">overcame</a> an eighth no confidence vote, despite the mountain of evidence of corrupt conduct that has emerged in recent months.

But it may prove to be a Pyrrhic victory &ndash; for him and most certainly for his party, the African National Congress (ANC). <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2017-08-08-zuma-supporters-celebrate-his-win-outa-considers-legal-action/">&ldquo;Hollow&rdquo;</a> was the word that one opposition leader, Bantu Holomisa, used afterward, while the Economic Freedom Fighter&rsquo;s leader Julius Malema employed a well-known Africa proverb: &ldquo;When you want to eat an elephant you do it bit by bit&rdquo;.

Zuma&rsquo;s political death is proving to be a protracted affair. There was an air of expectation yesterday that recent allegations of &ldquo;state capture&rdquo; &ndash; attested to by a welter of evidence from the so-called <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/2017/06/01/the-new-gupta-emails-are-a-lot-heres-what-they-say-in-5-quick_a_22120706/">#guptaleaks</a> &ndash; would be enough to persuade a sufficient number of the members of the ruling ANC to support an opposition-sponsored no confidence vote.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>On the previous seven occasions that the opposition has tabled no confidence votes since Zuma&rsquo;s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=On the previous seven occasions that the opposition has tabled no confidence votes since Zuma?s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

In the event, after a fractious two-hour debate scarred by ugly banter across the floor of the National Assembly, the motion fell short of the 201 votes required to remove Zuma and his cabinet. But yesterday was remarkably different. On the previous seven occasions that the opposition has tabled no confidence votes since Zuma&rsquo;s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president. Yesterday&rsquo;s vote was a watershed for the liberation movement that brought an end to apartheid in 1994: around 30 of the 223 ANC MPs who voted yesterday sided with the opposition.

As the ANC&rsquo;s chief whip, Jackson Mthembu, ruefully observed afterward, this is true pause for reflection for the ruling party. Never before has such a significant number of the parliamentary caucus rebelled and defied the party whip.

Zuma&rsquo;s streetwise political skills are well-known. So too is his adeptness at using executive patronage to secure the loyalty of party members as has been made clear in the revelations <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-22513410">arising from his links to the Gupta family</a>.

The secret ballot saga

But the back story to the unprecedented rebellion within his own party was the method of voting as much as Zuma&rsquo;s political skullduggery. For the first time, Parliament was compelled to allow MPs <a href="https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/national/2017-08-07-mbete-allows-secret-ballot/">to vote in secret</a>. This followed a <a href="http://www.702.co.za/articles/251722/bantu-holomisa-explains-parly-rules-on-secret-ballot">legal challenge</a> to the rules by Holomisa&rsquo;s United Democratic Movement.

In its 22 June <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2017-06-22-read-in-full-concourt-ruling-on-secret-ballot/">judgment</a>, the Constitutional Court &ndash; an institutional beacon of excellence and integrity in the context of the &ldquo;capture&rdquo; of other state bodies &ndash; had held that the speaker of the National Assembly had the discretion to order a secret ballot in exceptional circumstances.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma&rsquo;s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma?s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Since the ruling, a number of ANC MPs have gone public with a testimony of intimidation and even <a href="http://ewn.co.za/2017/07/12/makhosi-khoza-s-daughter-receives-death-threats">death threats</a> in the case of Makhosi Khoza. In turn, the ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma&rsquo;s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go. The intervention served to underline the need to depart from the generally established principle of open voting.

Accordingly, speaker Baleka Mbete had a little legal choice but to opt for a secret ballot, even though it would encourage dissenting voices among the ranks of the ANC caucus. Politically, she had probably done the political mathematics and, as the national chairperson of the ANC was confident that regardless of the shield that she said was necessary to protect ANC MPs so that they could vote with their conscience, the numbers would still work out in Zuma&rsquo;s favor.

And so it proved: 177 MPs voted for the motion, and 198 against (with 9 abstentions). Since the opposition has 151 MPs, at least three of whom were absent through illness, it means that that at least 29 and possibly as many as 35 ANC MPs jumped ship.

Win-win for the opposition

But it was a win-win situation for the opposition. Afterward, in the unseasonably balmy winter&rsquo;s evening outside the parliament in Cape Town, one after another of the leaders of the opposition spoke cheerfully about the political future and of the health of South Africa&rsquo;s democracy.

They may have lost the battle, but they feel confident that they will win the war. After all, it is clear that Zuma is now their greatest electoral asset, with <a href="http://www.biznews.com/leadership/2017/05/31/ipsos-poll-zuma-unpopular/">several polls </a>(including the respected <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2016-05-19-afrobarometer-trio-of-polls-show-shifting-attitudes-but-voters-would-still-opt-for-anc/#.WYo8na17Gi4">Afrobarometer</a>), showing that across race and class, trust in Zuma has collapsed since he was returned to power for a second term in 2014.

Last year, the ANC suffered its first major electoral setbacks since the advent of democracy in 1994 when it <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolt-of-south-africas-metropoles-a-revolution-of-rising-expectations-64617">lost control</a> of three major city governments in Pretoria, Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth. Now, it&#39;s political management skills appear to be in disarray as factionalism and deep, painful divisions dominate internal party politics. This is all unfolding in the run-up to what is likely to be a bloody five-yearly <a href="http://www.anc.org.za/content/venue-anc-54th-national-conference">national elective conference</a> in December, at which the ANC will elect a new President of the party to succeed Zuma.

That may or may not mark the start of a new era of renewal for the ANC. But Zuma&rsquo;s term as President of the country is only due to end in 2019. A lot more damage could be done to the country&rsquo;s economy and its prospects for growth.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority in the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela&rsquo;s historic victory in 1994.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority in the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela?s historic victory in 1994." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The consequence of that, however, is that the ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority in the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela&rsquo;s historic victory in 1994.

Yesterday may have been a victory for Zuma. But in the longer term, it is likely to come to be seen as a major defeat for the ANC.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-confidence-vote-a-victory-for-zuma-but-a-defeat-for-the-anc-82244">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

Yesterday may have been a victory for Zuma, but in the longer term, it is likely to come to be seen as a major defeat for the ANC.

Jacob Zuma is a natural born political survivor. Yesterday South Africa’s president overcame an eighth no confidence vote, despite the mountain of evidence of corrupt conduct that has emerged in recent months. But it may prove to be a Pyrrhic victory – for him and most certainly for his party, the African National Congress (ANC). “Hollow” was the word that one opposition leader, Bantu Holomisa, used afterward, while the Economic Freedom Fighter’s leader Julius Malema employed a well-known Africa proverb: “When you want to eat an elephant you do it bit by bit”. Zuma’s political death is proving to be a protracted affair. There was an air of expectation yesterday that recent allegations of “state capture” – attested to by a welter of evidence from the so-called #guptaleaks – would be enough to persuade a sufficient number of the members of the ruling ANC to support an opposition-sponsored no confidence vote. On the previous seven occasions that the opposition has tabled no confidence votes since Zuma’s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president. × In the event, after a fractious two-hour debate scarred by ugly banter across the floor of the National Assembly, the motion fell short of the 201 votes required to remove Zuma and his cabinet. But yesterday was remarkably different. On the previous seven occasions that the opposition has tabled no confidence votes since Zuma’s power began in 2009, the ANC has remained steadfast in its support for its beleaguered president. Yesterday’s vote was a watershed for the liberation movement that brought an end to apartheid in 1994: around 30 of the 223 ANC MPs who voted yesterday sided with the opposition. As the ANC’s chief whip, Jackson Mthembu, ruefully observed afterward, this is true pause for reflection for the ruling party. Never before has such a significant number of the parliamentary caucus rebelled and defied the party whip. Zuma’s streetwise political skills are well-known. So too is his adeptness at using executive patronage to secure the loyalty of party members as has been made clear in the revelations arising from his links to the Gupta family. The secret ballot saga But the back story to the unprecedented rebellion within his own party was the method of voting as much as Zuma’s political skullduggery. For the first time, Parliament was compelled to allow MPs to vote in secret. This followed a legal challenge to the rules by Holomisa’s United Democratic Movement. In its 22 June judgment, the Constitutional Court – an institutional beacon of excellence and integrity in the context of the “capture” of other state bodies – had held that the speaker of the National Assembly had the discretion to order a secret ballot in exceptional circumstances. The ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma’s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go. × Since the ruling, a number of ANC MPs have gone public with a testimony of intimidation and even death threats in the case of Makhosi Khoza. In turn, the ANC shot itself in the foot when one region of Zuma’s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, demanded that disciplinary proceedings be brought against Khoza after she had called for Zuma to go. The intervention served to underline the need to depart from the generally established principle of open voting. Accordingly, speaker Baleka Mbete had a little legal choice but to opt for a secret ballot, even though it would encourage dissenting voices among the ranks of the ANC caucus. Politically, she had probably done the political mathematics and, as the national chairperson of the ANC was confident that regardless of the shield that she said was necessary to protect ANC MPs so that they could vote with their conscience, the numbers would still work out in Zuma’s favor. And so it proved: 177 MPs voted for the motion, and 198 against (with 9 abstentions). Since the opposition has 151 MPs, at least three of whom were absent through illness, it means that that at least 29 and possibly as many as 35 ANC MPs jumped ship. Win-win for the opposition But it was a win-win situation for the opposition. Afterward, in the unseasonably balmy winter’s evening outside the parliament in Cape Town, one after another of the leaders of the opposition spoke cheerfully about the political future and of the health of South Africa’s democracy. They may have lost the battle, but they feel confident that they will win the war. After all, it is clear that Zuma is now their greatest electoral asset, with several polls (including the respected Afrobarometer), showing that across race and class, trust in Zuma has collapsed since he was returned to power for a second term in 2014. Last year, the ANC suffered its first major electoral setbacks since the advent of democracy in 1994 when it lost control of three major city governments in Pretoria, Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth. Now, it's political management skills appear to be in disarray as factionalism and deep, painful divisions dominate internal party politics. This is all unfolding in the run-up to what is likely to be a bloody five-yearly national elective conference in December, at which the ANC will elect a new President of the party to succeed Zuma. That may or may not mark the start of a new era of renewal for the ANC. But Zuma’s term as President of the country is only due to end in 2019. A lot more damage could be done to the country’s economy and its prospects for growth. ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority in the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela’s historic victory in 1994. × The consequence of that, however, is that the ANC will face the prospect of losing its majority in the national polls for the first time since Nelson Mandela’s historic victory in 1994. Yesterday may have been a victory for Zuma. But in the longer term, it is likely to come to be seen as a major defeat for the ANC. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

No confidence vote: a victory for Zuma, but a defeat for the ANC

If South African lawmakers vote in favour of Tuesday&#39;s no-confidence motion in President Jacob Zuma, he will be forced to resign along with his entire cabinet.

But the process has no precedent in South Africa, and it throws up thorny questions about the constitution and the political turmoil that would be triggered by a shock victory for his opponents.

After the president resigns, the parliamentary Speaker would become acting president and the national assembly would then have to elect a new president from its members within 30 days.

The ruling ANC party has a large majority in the house, and would choose the incoming national leader. But the party could be torn apart by the ousting of Zuma and the debate over who should succeed him.

Analysts say that MPs might back deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa -- while the party&#39;s executive might go for another candidate such as the Speaker herself, Baleka Mbete.

Ramaphosa&#39;s main rival Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Zuma&#39;s former wife, would not be eligible as she is not a lawmaker at present.

&quot;Passing a vote of no confidence may create chaos within the governing ANC,&quot; constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos wrote in the Daily Maverick online news site.

Divisions between MPs and the party executive &quot;could lead to instability and even open warfare,&quot; he said.

&#39;All hell would break out&#39; 
A long power struggle could also ensue if the ANC executive tried to ensure victory for its preferred candidate by replacing current MPs with new loyal members.

&quot;ANC MPs against whom action is taken would be able to approach the courts to challenge the expulsion. The process could drag on for years,&quot; said de Vos.

The timing of the vote adds to the uncertainty, as the ANC is already entering a period of change.

Zuma is due to resign as ANC party chief in December, and he must step down as national president ahead of the 2019 general election.

If he is ousted on Tuesday, &quot;all hell would break out within the party ahead of its conference in December,&quot; said Roger Southall, a professor at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg.

&quot;The ANC would be at war with itself, with little or no prospect of it facing the electorate in 2019 in one piece.&quot;

Zuma is widely seen as preparing the ground for his ex-wife Dlamini-Zuma to succeed him as party chief in December and then as national president.

But if -- against the odds -- he was forced out of the office by the vote, all bets would be off.

Opposition parties, led by the centrist Democratic Alliance and the radical Economic Freedom Fighters, hope the turmoil could mean the once all-powerful ANC is defeated or forced into coalition in the 2019 election.

Zuma is due to resign as ANC party chief in December, and he must step down as national president ahead of the 2019 general election

If South African lawmakers vote in favour of Tuesday's no-confidence motion in President Jacob Zuma, he will be forced to resign along with his entire cabinet. But the process has no precedent in South Africa, and it throws up thorny questions about the constitution and the political turmoil that would be triggered by a shock victory for his opponents. After the president resigns, the parliamentary Speaker would become acting president and the national assembly would then have to elect a new president from its members within 30 days. The ruling ANC party has a large majority in the house, and would choose the incoming national leader. But the party could be torn apart by the ousting of Zuma and the debate over who should succeed him. Analysts say that MPs might back deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa -- while the party's executive might go for another candidate such as the Speaker herself, Baleka Mbete. Ramaphosa's main rival Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Zuma's former wife, would not be eligible as she is not a lawmaker at present. "Passing a vote of no confidence may create chaos within the governing ANC," constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos wrote in the Daily Maverick online news site. Divisions between MPs and the party executive "could lead to instability and even open warfare," he said. 'All hell would break out' A long power struggle could also ensue if the ANC executive tried to ensure victory for its preferred candidate by replacing current MPs with new loyal members. "ANC MPs against whom action is taken would be able to approach the courts to challenge the expulsion. The process could drag on for years," said de Vos. The timing of the vote adds to the uncertainty, as the ANC is already entering a period of change. Zuma is due to resign as ANC party chief in December, and he must step down as national president ahead of the 2019 general election. If he is ousted on Tuesday, "all hell would break out within the party ahead of its conference in December," said Roger Southall, a professor at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. "The ANC would be at war with itself, with little or no prospect of it facing the electorate in 2019 in one piece." Zuma is widely seen as preparing the ground for his ex-wife Dlamini-Zuma to succeed him as party chief in December and then as national president. But if -- against the odds -- he was forced out of the office by the vote, all bets would be off. Opposition parties, led by the centrist Democratic Alliance and the radical Economic Freedom Fighters, hope the turmoil could mean the once all-powerful ANC is defeated or forced into coalition in the 2019 election.

What happens if Zuma loses South Africa parliament vote?