The National Dialogue: Pathway to a People's Plan for South Africa

Occasional Paper 8/2024

Read as PDF

Copyright © 2024

Inclusive Society Institute

PO Box 12609

Mill Street

Cape Town, 8010

South Africa

235-515 NPO

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form

or by any means without the permission in writing from the Inclusive Society Institute.

DISCLAIMER

Views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of the

Inclusive Society Institute or those of their respective Board or Council members.

O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

THE NATIONAL DIALOGUE

Pathway to a People’s Plan for South Africa 

Dr Klaus Kotzé

BA Social Dynamics, BSocSci Honours Political Communication, Master in Global Studies, PhD Rhetoric Studies

 Abstract

South African society remains unjust and unsustainably unequal. For many years, voices from all corners have suggested that processes be undertaken to give rightful expression to the transformational aspirations captured in the South African constitution. With the formation of the Government of National Unity signifying a recalibration in South Africa’s political order, the time may just be right to initiate a new process towards greater peoples’ power. A process that will structurally and comprehensively address the enduring societal hardships and bring about a more just and equitable society for all. This paper discusses the potential that a comprehensive consultative national dialogue has in critically addressing South Africa’s persistent problems. It proposes that such a dialogue holds enormous potential to convene a common South African vision, and suggests the pathways and processes needed for it to bring about socio-economic transformation.

The members of the 7th administration in the Government of National Unity (GNU)        Picture: X / South African Government

Introduction

A comprehensive national consultative dialogue (national dialogue) is being advanced as a suitable pathway to equitably and justly transform South African society. The calls for such a process have grown louder following the electoral shift from single-party rule, with the Government of National Unity being an expression of where the country finds itself. In the way that negotiation and consensus brought about the Government of National Unity, so too a national dialogue can give rise to a people of national unity.

In his inauguration speech following the recent national elections, President Ramaphosa invited “all parties, civil society, labour, business and other formations to a national dialogue on the critical challenges facing the nation”. Whereas the President’s leadership should be appreciated; the national dialogue should not be led by government alone, nor should it be steered by any one sector. Instead, it must entail an extensive negotiation between all sectors of society. For the process of a national dialogue to be authoritative and for its goals and programmes actionable, it must entail the expressed will of the majority of South Africans. For it to be an effective common vision, the active participation and assent of all of society is required. It is from its democratic participation and accord that a national dialogue receives its legitimacy, and it is its legitimacy that affords it power.

To ensure its legitimacy, the processes and structures of the national dialogue are extremely significant. As with the consultative process that gave expression to the democratic state, so too will it require the consultation and consensus by comprehensive stakeholders, to recognise and understand each other, and to cohere what is needed to realise development and transformation. In appreciating that its process will be protracted and complicated, this paper nevertheless recognises the urgent need to commence the process. It thus seeks to contribute to a broader discussion about the merits, processes and structures required to make the dialogue effective.  

Towards a legitimate national dialogue

A national dialogue is an inclusive and transparent negotiating mechanism that is used to influence and give shape to a new socio-political consensus. National dialogues have typically taken place in countries undergoing significant political transition (e.g. Benin, Togo, Yemen)  (Papagianni, 2016). These dialogues involve a broad range of stakeholders collectively discussing issues and proposing pathways to find common ground and resolution. National dialogues are therefore protracted social negotiations between parties with clear positions and interests.

The intention that goes into its formation and the way a national dialogue is put together is of utmost importance. In a give-and-take manner they engage the diverse views and interests of participants. The goal is then to deliver a constructive settlement. A consensual programme of action that the different parties can accept and implement. A national dialogue, therefore, offers passage through transition. Through recognising others and being recognised. Through the process of finding consensus through compromise, it embodies and directs the new (transitioned) political order. Such a new political order is often captured in a new national constitution – a basic set of laws and principles to guide the nation. Where legitimate constitutions are in place, a people’s plan of action is commensurate.

National dialogues offer a comprehensive path for all citizens to be part of the political process. This process of claiming political agency, mobilising towards a cause, is not new in South Africa. In fact, South Africa’s culture of political mobilisation is a national asset which, if rekindled can substantially advance the national project. In the manner that the Freedom Charter claimed that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, and that the people shall govern (African National Congress, 2024), so too the myriad of formations of the 1980s rallied around and then realised the concepts of people’s power and a people’s government (South African History Online, 2024). It was through claiming political agency that political agency was attained. So too it must be through inclusive measures that collectively address inequality, that a more inclusive and equal society will be engendered.

While the negotiations and consultations of the 1990s established a value-based South African national order, bringing about the settlement of disorder and separateness, no supplementary people’s driven programme of societal action was established so to ensure equitable and just transformation. Instead of an additional engagement whereby the various sectors and stakeholders convened to set out and pursue such a programme, the new government, as the authoritative representatives of the people, was singularly charged to give expression to development through the realm of governmental policy. 

Today, whereas South Africa has an established and legitimate political order, much of the inequities and inequalities that were present at the turn to democracy, remain unresolved. The government’s centralised, top-heavy approach to development has neglected participative democracy, the very claim of the ‘people’s power’. The receding of the public’s political involvement in the democratic era has left the application of constitutional values and aspirations to the centralised government, supplemented by non-governmental entities and philanthropy. Instead, to give true expression to the constitution, a bottom-up, people’s programme of action is needed. 

By bringing together the interests, the needs and the proposed solutions of citizens, the national dialogue will consolidate society-wide development structures. Citizens must take ownership of South Africa’s strategic transformation, giving expression to the human-centred and progressive values and principles of the constitution.

It is therefore the process of South African Constitutionalism, the responsibility of every citizen to the nation, that must be inspected and debated. To effectively bring about the resolution of the national challenges, the national dialogue must have broadly endorsed structures with inclusive programmes that are manageable and well communicated. These structures and the issues they address must find comprehensive support. Such support ensures that discussions move beyond elite-level decision-making and allows for the constructive resolution of national issues.

Public participation: The bedrock of a national dialogue

It is from extensive public participation that national dialogues gain their legitimacy, giving rise to a people of national unity. The national dialogue process can take from the constitutional negotiations and the public participation programme run by the Constitutional Assembly. The South African constitution did not derive its authority from imposition, but from being the result of a participative process of constitution-making. The extensive consultation and rationalisation by a broad cross-section of South Africans over a period of two years, collectively afforded the constitution its undisputed legitimacy. The final constitution was the endpoint of a consensus. A product of the rationalisation and then legitimation of the perceptions of a diverse people (Salazar, 2008).

The same holds for the national dialogue, which seeks not only to build consensus, but through consultation to channel the society’s demands, assign responsibility and deliver on its needs. To be an expression of the people’s will, the process and undertakings must initiate a public meeting space where different stakeholders, many of whom have never met, encounter each other so to establish new meaning and a new national narrative.

The proceedings of the national dialogue must be nationally structured and clearly communicated, so to ensure broad participation. The national dialogue must therefore entail a whole-of-society undertaking. Box-ticking exercises, such as those facilitated by the Presidency at the Social Cohesion Summit and Presidential Social Sector Summit, have been insufficient (Ramaphosa, 2022). In the case of the latter, civil society was invited for a two-day event, only to be spoken to and finally rounded into groups, afforded two hours to produce suggestions to impact government. Very little can be expected to follow. Indeed, these approaches may only facilitate a further break in trust between the citizens and the elite.

The national dialogue must rekindle and restore public participation as the expression of people’s power. By engaging in the process, citizens position themselves at the centre of power. The constitution makes it clear: in a representative democracy the public shall be given the space to influence policy outcomes that give expression to the will of the people (Legislative Sector South Africa, 2013). Not only did the government capture and overly centralise political power during the last 30 years, thereby not fulfilling its constitutional mandate to facilitate and incorporate public participation, but the public has also failed to move beyond simple electoral representation. The citizenry has reneged to sufficiently give expression to the very process of democracy.

Whereas during the Constitutional Assembly where a communication strategy ensured public participation and therefore ensured the authority of its outcomes, government and the legislature have resorted to box-ticking exercises. It is imperative that the national dialogue draw from the Constitutional Assembly. That it informs while it stimulates public participation – that listening is as central as speaking. In building new mechanisms that connect to the people (much easier in today’s digital realm), the national dialogue will give meaning and direction to public participation in the contemporary age.

Establishing the structure for South Africa’s national dialogue

For years, progressives have said that to realise effective transformation, South Africans must engage in a process that ensures justice and therefore the very survival of the state. Thus far, the public discussion on a national dialogue has mostly reflected the need for it. Very little has been proposed in terms of what types of processes and structures would ensure its legitimacy and effectiveness.

This paper does not attempt to address the substantive nature of the national dialogue. This will be debated and established by its participants. It is therefore imperative that it is structured so as to allow for a protracted, open and engaging space of talking and listening. But the national dialogue cannot only be a talk-shop. Its structure must be goals- and outcomes oriented. In doing so, the very process of the dialogue will see to it that new perceptions emerge. When different actors from different cultures navigate in good faith to find each other, they will craft new meanings and, in the process, quite tangibly build the nation. They will give expression to the present moment and its’ predicaments. Much like Desmond Tutu’s claim that South Africans are the rainbow people of God (Tutu, 1996), thereby uniting black and white during the transition, so too new understandings, new rhetorical mechanisms will emerge when the different sectors deliberate about the present moment.

Thorough preparation will be central to its success. Before its commencement, the national dialogue must establish its independent relationship to the existing state institutions. It must be clear about its mandate and where it fits into the legal and political system. Its powers, decision-making ability and dispute resolution mechanisms, along with other technical aspects must be clarified before it can start its proceedings. So too, it must be determined where the process will be allocated. Which government department will fund and oversee the proceedings.

The first step would be to convene a preparatory committee to assemble all aspects required for the dialogue. Where countries are in transition, the preparatory committees are typically steered by a collective comprising a variety of factions. In the case of South Africa, a constitutional democracy, the Constitutional Court is the legitimate authority. The Constitutional Court could thus assist in the process by assembling a preparatory committee. In the way that CODESA was opened by Chief Justice Corbett, so too the court could assist in initial proceedings (South African History Online, 2024a). By doing so, it lends it legitimacy. This committee must be broadly representative, thereby averting the criticism lodged against CODESA, that it was dominated by the political elite. Once the committee is elected the court should withdraw from the proceedings.

Once established, a strategic communication team could be brought in to assist. Together they could draw up a compelling case for the national dialogue, ensuring that potential participants and the public at large comprehend the nature of the dialogue, the urgency of the proceedings and how it will be in their interest to participate.

The preparatory committee would be responsible for amongst others: 

• Determining the pool size of dialogue participants.

• Establishing the method, criteria and process whereby dialogue participants are selected. A step-by-step process should establish how to determine which groupings or constituencies (political parties, religious bodies, civil society groupings, professional bodies, interest and business groups etc.) be included. The committee would then have to agree on sub-categories and the sub-division of categories (e.g. which and how many participants from each constituency are invited). In determining the pool of participants, space should be allowed both for participants that are appointed or nominated and for self-selection. This will allow for representivity while ensuring no group has too much influence. The committee will also have to determine the basis for participation and which principles determine participation.

• Drafting the parameters that all constituencies must undertake to respect.

• Determining the time frame and the different stages of the proceedings.

• Establish a mechanism through which to assist the different constituencies in the process of the dialogue.

• Determining the logistics, including the details of the venues, support for participants to travel to the venues, use of technology, security and other considerations. 

• Drafting the agenda for and setting the dates for the initial series of meetings. It is from this series of meetings, whereby all participants will be included and where each will have equal representation, that the final structure and substance of the national dialogue will be established.  

• Sourcing, managing and allocation of funding 

Whereas a preparatory committee would conceive of the broader framework of the national dialogue, the totality of participants would convene to design its structure and assign its substance. The first series of discussions must deliberate and set out the following:

Steering committee:

• A representative steering committee could be democratically elected from the broad range of participants in the first sitting.

• The steering committee could then take over from the preparatory committee and would consist of a broad collection of parties, thereby ensuring inclusivity.

• It would confirm or amend the decisions of the preparatory committee.

• It would lead the establishment of the structure and manage the process of the national dialogue.

• The steering committee would oversee:

  • The facilitation of the national dialogue

  • Setting the agenda

  • Where meetings are to take place, how and when

  • Establish the decision-making process, including decision-making responsibility and how decisions are made (e.g. simple majority).

  • How participants are to be regulated and if need be, disciplined

  • How to keep participants accountable

  • How funding is to be sourced and disbursed

  • The role of outside players, such as regional bodies and international non-government entities

  • The establishment of a secretariat, and detailing its resourcing and duties of the secretariate

  • How the final resolution will be drawn up and implemented

It could be that when the steering committee is democratically elected from the floor, the floor then deliberates and agrees on the number of working groups. Discussing and agreeing on the topics or themes of the different working groups. Themes could be drawn from the values and aspirations set out in the Constitution.

Working groups:

• How many working groups are to be established and how each will be composed so to ensure representativity.

• The election of working group chairs and secretaries.

• How much time will be afforded to deliberate before agreement or sufficient consensus is required.

• What sufficient consensus entails and how each group will reach sufficient consensus. Each group, due to their varied composition will establish their own understanding of sufficient consensus.

Declaration of intent

A proposed final task of the initial meetings would be to establish a declaration of intent for the national dialogue. It is critical that all parties to the dialogue collectively commit to such a shared basic programme of action. 

In its Declaration of Intent, CODESA sought to establish a democratic, non-discriminatory constitution; a unitary state composed of a diversity of cultures, religions and linguistic groups; constitutional supremacy; multi-party democracy; separation of powers; and universal human rights and civil liberties. It also agreed that all proposals should be consistent with democracy, and that a mechanism would be established, in co-operation with government, to draft the texts of legislation required to give effect to its agreements (African National Congress, 2024a).

Codesa: Declaration of Intent    Picture: https://ourconstitution.wethepeoplesa.org/the-convention-for-a-democratic-south-africa/

Similarly, the current Government of National Unity is undergirded by the foundational principles, basic minimum programme and modalities that are set out in its Statement of Intent (African National Congress, 2024b). Both pledges sought to offer a guiding document that set out the policy direction and agenda. Establishing how the parties would work together, and how a common goal would bind them together. By detailing and agreeing to these details, the diverse participants were able to collectively pursue the same end from their different means and ways. The establishment of a declaration of intent, to guide its processes, will be invaluable to the successful implementation of the national dialogue. 

A People’s Plan

The discussions at the working groups, whether about crime, justice, inequality etc., will inform the national comprehension of each topic. After sufficient consensus is attained, each working group would draw up their findings and proposals.

The steering committee, with the assistance of an appointed communications team, would then undertake a protracted, nation-wide consultative process. It is imperative that South African citizens not only be informed about the dialogue but that they actively take part therein. People should be able to contribute to the substantive nature of the themes, so to take ownership of the process and its outcomes. The public participation programme would be most effective when it is widely mediatised, so to ensure accessibility and transparency. Like the communication roll-out during the Constitutional Assembly process, publications, now primarily through digital media, would provide detailed insight.

After an extensive public participation programme, the accumulated views and inputs would be synchronised and brought to the final phase of the national dialogue. The plenary constituting the entire pool of national dialogue participants would meet to discuss the outputs of the working groups, in conjunction with the additional contributions of the public. In this manner, the outcomes will be a truly South African product of its people. During the final plenaries, a final People’s Plan for South Africa will be debated and then assembled.

Whereas the National Development Plan, released in 2012, involved many experts and non-governmental constituencies, it remained a product of government. A prescribed vision. As a democracy with a consultative political culture, a Plan that is visibly and audibly a product of the people, one that gives expression to their lived realities and that arose from their experiences will have the potential to be truly transformative. It will be a democratic product, one that everyone can feel that they have a say in and can take ownership over. The National Development Plan should not be discarded, but as government’s plan it should be consulted and aligned so to underpin the People’s Plan.

A People’s Pledge, undersigned by citizens, businesses, civil society organisations etc. can be developed as a summarised version of the Plan. In so doing, it will allow citizens to expressly commit to a just and transformed South Africa.

Conclusion

A comprehensive national dialogue offers a pathway to establishing a common vision and People’s Plan. A Plan that will give expression to the values and aspirations of the South African Constitution. For too long, South Africans have possessed over an extraordinarily progressive Constitution without experiencing what it is truly capable of.

For too long, economic and social inequalities have delayed the justice that was promised with the transition to democracy.

For too long effective transformation and development have been bungled or deferred.

It is time that the people’s power that was fought for is given its true expression. The national dialogue and a People’s Plan offer the opportunity to remake the nation. To move South Africa away from its unsustainable path as an utterly unequal society. To bring about Constitutional transformation that is real and felt. And to instil meaning and purpose, so as to truly give expression to a united national identity.

References

African National Congress, 2024. The Freedom Charter. [Online] Available at: https://www.anc1912.org.za/the-freedom-charter-2/ [accessed: 5 September 2024].

African National Congress, 2024a. CODESA: Declaration of Intent. [Online] Available at: https://www.anc1912.org.za/declarations-1991-codesa-declaration-of-intent/ [accessed: 5 September 2024].

African National Congress, 2024b. Statement of Intent of the 2024 Government of National Unity. [Online] Available at: https://www.anc1912.org.za/statement-of-intent-of-the-2024-government-of-national-unity-2/ [accessed 6 September 2024].

Legislative Sector South Africa, 2016. Public Participation Framework for the South African Legislative Sector. [Online] Available at: https://sals.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/simple-file-list/ppf.pdf [accessed: 5 September 2024].

Papagianni, K. 2016. Civil Society Dialogue Network Discussion Paper No. 3: National Dialogue Processes in Political Transitions. Civil Society Dialogue Network. [Online] Available at: https://www.hdcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/National-Dialogue-Processes-in-Political-Transitions-January-2014.pdf [accessed: 12 September 2024].

Ramaphosa, C. 2022. President to address presidential social sector summit. [Online] Available at: https://thepresidency.gov.za/president-address-presidential-social-sector-summit [accessed: 8 September 2024].

Salazar, P-J. 2008. An African Athens: Rhetoric and the Shaping of Democracy in South Africa. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Cape Town.

South African History Online, 2024. People’s Power, 1986. [Online] Available at: https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/peoples-power-1986 [accessed: 5 September 2024].

South African History Online, 2024a. Convention for a Democratic South Africa. [Online] Available at: https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/convention-democratic-south-africa-codesa [accessed: 5 September 2024].

Tutu, D. 1996. The Rainbow People of God: The Making of a Peaceful Revolution. Random House Publishing Group, Cape Town.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This report has been published by the Inclusive Society Institute

The Inclusive Society Institute (ISI) is an autonomous and independent institution that functions independently from any other entity. It is founded for the purpose of supporting and further deepening multi-party democracy. The ISI’s work is motivated by its desire to achieve non-racialism, non-sexism, social justice and cohesion, economic development and equality in South Africa, through a value system that embodies the social and national democratic principles associated with a developmental state. It recognises that a well-functioning democracy requires well-functioning political formations that are suitably equipped and capacitated. It further acknowledges that South Africa is inextricably linked to the ever transforming and interdependent global world, which necessitates international and multilateral cooperation. As such, the ISI also seeks to achieve its ideals at a global level through cooperation with like-minded parties and organs of civil society who share its basic values. In South Africa, ISI’s ideological positioning is aligned with that of the current ruling party and others in broader society with similar ideals.

Email: info@inclusivesociety.org.za

Phone: +27 (0) 21 201 1589

Web: www.inclusivesociety.org.za