Publications
Partners
South Africans this week witnessed what many established democracies can only dream of. Several of the country’s top legal minds converged on the Union Buildings to lay their claims to the vacant position of National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP).
The process to select and appoint the new prosecution chief was different from the convention on how the post has been filled in the past.
No NDPP has finished their term since South Africa became a democracy.
Their life was either made miserable by some powerful forces, they were forced out by bad elements in the governing party or they did not meet the standard and were turfed by the courts.
Instead of exercising his constitutionally enshrined prerogative to appoint the next NDPP, President Cyril Ramaphosa chose a different route.
He picked a panel that went through piles of CVs and short-listed only those who stood a chance to replace Shaun Abrahams.
And those lucky enough were then taken through a rigorous interview process, beamed live on our TV screens.
The country was glued to their screens and listened to the candidates answering very difficult questions from panellists on why they thought they should be the next prosecutions boss.
While Ramaphosa will make the ultimate decision on who gets the job, the panel would have made its recommendations clear, based on the outcome of the interviews.
This must be the most democratic process to fill the important job of someone who will take decisions to prosecute people without fear or favour.
Transparency on its own may not necessarily be a 100% guarantee that we will get the best candidate.
But it will tell how to watch the new incumbent by his or her strengths and weaknesses.
Ramaphosa’s decision to go this route – of openness – should be precedent-setting when similar positions – Auditor-General; police commissioner; directors-general of departments and chief executives of state-owned entities – become vacant.
The public interview will instil public confidence.
Democracy will be seen to be working rather than when important appointments are left to the president, who could use his discretion to hire those whom he can manipulate.
It will cosset South Africa’s institutions should there be another Jacob Zuma in the future.
