The African National Congress (ANC) has welcomed the signing into law last week of the Public Service Commission (PSC) Act, describing the legislation as an important step towards strengthening state capacity and building a more professional public service.

The Act replaces the 1997 Act and strengthens the independence and role of the PSC. Largely confined to an advisory role since 1997, the PSC constitutional body is now empowered to monitor administrative practices, investigate failures, and require its decisions to be implemented. It also establishes penalties for obstructing the PSC’s work.

The ANC said the legislation validated the need for a developmental state and the National Development Plan’s objective of building a capable, ethical, and effective state. The ANC says the legislation will help address weaknesses in government administration and close gaps in oversight. It also argues that effective implementation of government policy depends on a professional and accountable public service capable of delivering services and carrying out the state’s programmes.

The party claimed that it had long advocated for such a system: “Rooted in its historical National Democratic Revolution (NDR), the ANC has always advocated moving away from nepotism and maladministration toward a meritocratic, professionalised, and depoliticised civil service capable of driving South Africa’s socio-economic trajectory.”

However, this misstates the ANC’s historical position. The sidelining of the PSC was undertaken as part of the party’s programme to assert political control over the civil service. In the late 1990s, party documents explicitly demanded it would commandeer “all levers of power”. As part of this initiative, the ANC initiated a party policy of cadre deployment, in terms of which a party committee mediated appointments into the state. Senior party leaders also publicly rejected the notion that the state should be non-partisan.

In 1997, for example, an ANC Member of Parliament (and subsequently Public Service Commissioner) Maria Ratho declared in Parliament: “It is imperative to get rid of merit as the overriding principle in the appointment of public servants.”

The Zondo Commission found that this was central to the “state capture” phenomenon and that cadre deployment lacked any legal or constitutional justification. Minutes it obtained demonstrated that the cadre deployment committee was even receiving applications for state employment.

The National Planning Commission has also referred to the South African state as having “rejected” merit in staffing.

The Common Sense spoke to Terence Corrigan of the Institute of Race Relations, who has written and commented widely on public administration.

“There is some chutzpah in the ANC trying to pretend that it has always been in favour of anything like professionalism and meritocracy,” he said. “Back in the 1990s, it would go as far as dismissing those who raised these concerns as racists.”

He added that there had been extreme reluctance to concede to relinquishing political meddling in the public service. “This remains the case. President Cyril Rampahosa tried, laughably, to argue that cadre deployment adds another layer of accountability. As though removing it would make things worse. It’s utterly absurd. Even as there is a nominal process of professionalisation of the state – note that they are talking about ‘professionalisation’, acknowledging that the state is not a professionally competent entity – the ANC blithely claims that there is nothing wrong with cadre deployment and it’s going to carry on. If it does, there is no prospect of any improvement.”

He said that the new Act is a very significant move in the right direction, although the PSC needed stronger powers – and political leadership needed to respect the prerogatives of the administration.

PSC chairperson Professor Somadoda Fikeni said of the Act: “It is going back to simply clarifying the role of the Public Service Commission as was envisaged in the Constitution. But it has taken nineteen years.”