The governments of South Africa and Brazil are in trouble

When economies slow down or go into recession, many people are frustrated, and governments look weaker. That is currently the case in both South Africa and Brazil. In this kind of setting, corruption claims resonate with the public more than they normally would. In other words, these are promising times for anyone with an interest in toppling the top leader.

Making matters worse, many South Africans have been angry for a long time because the end of Apartheid brought them political liberty, but not prosperity. They feel cheated. Things are slightly different in Brazil, where standards of life increased considerably in the past two decades, but many people are now plunging back into poverty again because of the recession.

In both countries, democracy is still young. The memories of a less fortunate past haunt politicians as well as citizens at large. In South Africa, the mind-set of President Jacob Zuma and other leaders in ANC, the ruling party, is still the one of clandestine freedom fighters involved in armed struggle. They see the world in terms of “us versus them” – and that applies to adversaries in their own party too. Zuma probably believes that he is entitled to do as he pleases because he is the head of the party that brought about multi-party democracy. It is a striking irony, that no party, so far, can really compete with the ANC and its aura of national liberation. The corruption allegations against Zuma and the party may contribute to changing that.

The public is appalled to learn that Zuma’s business friends have a track record of offering cabinet posts to politicians in return for favours. The ANC would be well advised to drop its president and investigate the issues – but doing so is not in its DNA. Among underground freedom fighters, personal loyalty beats questions of procedure. It looks as though governance in South Africa will deteriorate further before things get better. 

In Brazil, President Dilma Rousseff’s Workers’ Party does not have a similarly dominant position. Nonetheless, past traumas still hurt. When the country was under military rule, Rousseff belonged to the opposition, became a political prisoner and was tortured. Her personal history tells her that her political opponents are willing to use anything to harm her cause. Her experience tells her that she has reason to worry that members of the elite are planning a coup against her left-leaning government. She is reading recent judicial investigations as proof of her suspicions. That Lula da Silva, her mentor and predecessor is implicated too, makes the matter even more emotive.

Adding to Brazil’s problems, members of the country’s judiciary have released evidence – including recordings of phone calls – to embarrass Lula and his successor. This approach is unwise. Courts should investigate thoroughly and then pass evidence-based rulings. Judges must not feed political discontent by releasing evidence, and that is especially so when there is doubt that the evidence itself was obtained by legal means. Tapping the president’s telephone without warrant is illegal in every democracy.

Responsible judges have to make sure that they are seen to be ensuring the rule of law. In Brazil’s case, the judge Sergio Moro is currently raising his profile in a way that makes me wonder whether he is planning to run for president himself one day.

Institutions are ultimately what people expect and consider normal. A strong democracy depends on people expecting constitutional principles to be respected. If they experience that happening, their expectations will become more deeply entrenched. The constitutional orders are still young in both South Africa and Brazil. People’s hopes must not be shattered – or their expectations will deviate from democracy. If the wrong kind of expectations survive over the decades, democracy will always look troubled, as is evident in some EU countries, for instance Italy. Italians deserve better, and so do  South Africans and Brazilians. The behavior of leaders in all institutions matters.