![The market-builder who restrained the market [Part 2]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/PHOTO-2026-08-25-17-16-32-360x180.jpg)
![The merchant preceding the Prophetic mission [Part 1]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/01-360x180.jpg)
‘Formal political process is failing people, with only few people benefitting from it through connections and bribery.’ – Khetha Ngcobo, Azanian Youth in Action
In this second article of his monthly column, MPHUTLANE WA BOFELO argues that public participation in policy forums and sectoral engagements, along with service delivery, could suffer another blow as political parties try to upstage each other in preparation for local government elections which are scheduled for 2026.
THE Government of National Unity (GNU) came into power in a political and governance environment characterised by high levels of public distrust in government and increasing scepticism towards formal political structures and processes.
So far, the GNU’s pronouncements and postures about collaborative and cooperative politics and collegial governance are accompanied by fierce party competition and ferocious contestations about the government’s social policy and political economy trajectory.
The interference of party-political agendas with the programmes and political communication of the government is likely to influence government engagement with the public, the provision of services and public perception of the government. This is likely to be more pronounced in 2025 as parties gear themselves towards the local government elections scheduled to take place between November 2, 2026, and February 1, 2027. Being the year before the local government elections, 2025 is likely to be the year in which the issues of the quality of public participation and service delivery are going to be hurled at the GNU.
Khulu Radebe, a community leader and co-founder of the Metsimaholo Stakeholders Forum, who has participated in public participation processes and platforms such as the People’s Assembly, sectoral engagements, public hearings and Presidential imbizos, observes that because of lack of feedback from such platforms and the general lack of recourse on issues affecting communities, the people end up engaged in protest that is sometimes leaderless, resulting in chaos and reckless violence.
Durban-based social activist, Celinkosi Nsibande, states that public participation platforms such as ward meetings are closely linked to people who are aligned to political parties and that those who are not associated with political parties are often sidelined or not listened to.
Likewise, Khetha Ngcobo, an activist of Azanian Youth in Action, posits that the formal political process is failing people, with only few people benefitting from it through connections and bribery.
Mvikeleni Gcwensa, a co-founder of Iphimbo Labasebenzi, says his observations about the workers parliament is that the resolutions taken there are suppressed by the authorities with the collusion of the officials of the unions and community organisations who are compromised by their interest in government tenders and appointments in government positions.
Sabelo, a community activist who participated in the public hearings on land reform, lists the barriers to effective use of public hearings as the fact that they become platforms for competition between interest groups with divergent political agendas and that resources and spatial arrangements lead to the marginalisation and exclusion of the voices of the rural poor.
Having participated in several sectoral engagements and public hearings, political activist Phezukonke Mthethwa is of the view that these engagements and hearings are mostly a box ticking exercise. Mthethwa adds that he has participated in ten protest marches, including the marches in which a memorandum of demands was submitted to the authorities, and none produced any tangible response or results.
Mthethwa’s opinion resonates with the experience of Hugh Msweli, the Secretary General of the Democratic Nurses Organization of South Africa (DENOSA), who recently participated in one public meeting.
You may also want to read
‘It was more of a report than participation. The programme was run by a ward counsellor belonging to a political party. The meeting was shaped to take a particular direction,’ declares Msweli.
Another labour activist, Yanathi Yawo, asserts that these platforms are not known by ordinary citizens.
‘It is as if they are made for only the elite. They are public but private. Awareness about these mechanisms (People’s Assembly, Taking Parliament to the People, Taking Committees to the People, sectoral engagements, public hearings, Presidential imbizos, and war rooms) is lacking. So, participation is lacking,’ declares Yawo.
The establishment of the GNU has brought hopes about relatively higher levels of prioritisation of public than personal interest and improved public participation and service delivery. There are mixed feelings among activists as to whether the GNU has met such expectations so far.
Radebe and Gcwensa declare that GNU has brought some balance in power and relatively higher level of accountability and performance from ministers. However, Mdlalose argues, ‘GNU has not brought any significant improvement on public participation except for the contestation between political elites on who should lead portfolio committees and (hold) executive positions’.
It is highly possible that this year the preoccupation of the parties within and outside the GNU with upstaging each other in the forthcoming local government elections is going to escalate divisive politics in South Africa. Effective engagement of government with citizens and efficient delivery of services are likely to suffer as each political party conveys to the citizens of South Africa a message about the government that serves its own partisan agenda and uses public services as an electioneering platform rather than a podium to advance collaborative politics and collegial governance.
Mphutlane wa Bofelo is a political theorist who focuses on the interface between politics, governance and development.
