The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) recently concluded its four-day National People’s Assembly (NPA) at the Nasrec Expo Centre in Soweto, Johannesburg. 

They adopted a declaration of intent centred on economic transformation, land redistribution, and addressing systemic inequalities. 

However, beyond these resolutions, the congress revealed deeper tensions in the party’s internal politics.

Julius Malema, the party’s charismatic and controversial commander-in-chief (CIC), was re-elected unopposed, solidifying his dominance in the EFF. Yet, the glaring absence of Dr Mbuyiseni Ndlozi from the Central Command Team (CCT) raised questions about the party’s direction, internal democracy, and claim to revolutionary transformation.

Unchallenged power

Malema’s unopposed re-election underscores his unassailable position within the EFF. His charisma and political skill have been 

central to the party’s rise, but his dominance has sparked concerns over a growing centralisation of power. 

The congress reflected minimal room for dissent, with Malema’s authority left virtually unchallenged.

In African political contexts, such dynamics are not new. The proverb “Moshunda Ihamukala eeedhi dili mbali,” meaning “there can only be one bull at a time in a kraal,” aptly describes Malema’s role in the EFF. 

While his leadership brings stability and focus, critics warn that it mirrors a pattern of consolidating power often seen in post-colonial liberation movements. These movements, once heralded for their revolutionary ideals, frequently devolve into personality-driven organisations that suppress internal dissent.

Marginalisation

Meanwhile, Ndlozi, a once-prominent intellectual voice and former spokesperson for the EFF, was notably absent from the party’s new CCT. 

Known for his eloquence and ideological depth, Ndlozi was seen as a critical counterbalance to Malema’s fiery leadership style.

Malema’s refusal to address Ndlozi’s exclusion – famously stating: “Don’t ask me anything about Mbuyiseni Ndlozi” – has only fuelled speculation about internal discord. Supporters of Ndlozi view his omission as a sign of the EFF’s increasing intolerance for alternative viewpoints. Detractors argue it reflects a shift in the party’s leadership culture, prioritising loyalty over merit and sidelining potential competition.

Some see parallels between Ndlozi’s fate and those of other former EFF leaders like Andile Mngxitama, who were also pushed out after clashes with Malema. 

This pattern raises concerns about whether the EFF is genuinely revolutionary or merely another iteration of traditional African political systems.

Promises vs old political patterns

The EFF has built its identity on challenging the status quo, promising radical transformation, and representing South Africa’s disillusioned masses. Yet, its internal dynamics suggest it may be falling into the same traps it critiques. 

The sidelining of Ndlozi, coupled with Malema’s uncontested authority, mirrors a trend of centralised leadership where internal democracy is stifled.

Movements that succeed in delivering revolutionary change often rely on diverse perspectives and collective leadership. 

The EFF’s inability to accommodate dissenting voices risks turning it into a party defined by one individual rather than a collective vision.

The proverb “Moshunda Ihamukala eeedhi dili mbali” encapsulates the notion of singular leadership, but it also warns of its limitations. 

For the EFF to achieve its revolutionary aspirations, it must avoid becoming a personality-driven organisation and embrace inclusivity, debate, and meritocracy.

Implications

Ndlozi’s exclusion has elicited mixed reactions. While some argue it is a necessary step to maintain unity in a growing organisation, others see it as symptomatic of the dangers of personality-driven politics. 

Eyewitness News reported insider speculation about Ndlozi’s uncertain future in the party, with fears he may face the same fate as other sidelined leaders.

The long-term implications of these dynamics could weaken the EFF’s credibility as a transformative force. 

For a party that claims to challenge entrenched systems, its internal practices must reflect the values of democracy and inclusivity it advocates.

Conclusion

The EFF’s National People’s Assembly was both a triumph and a cautionary tale. Malema’s re-election reaffirms his dominance, but the marginalisation of figures like Ndlozi casts a shadow over the party’s revolutionary claims. 

While the EFF remains a powerful force in South African politics, its internal struggles risk undermining its transformative potential. As the proverb suggests: 

“There can only be one bull in a kraal.” However, for the EFF to truly lead a revolution, it must evolve beyond this singularity. 

Only by fostering a culture of collective leadership, internal democracy, and openness to dissent can it deliver on its promises of radical change for South Africa. 

Without these, the EFF risks becoming another example of old African politics cloaked in revolutionary rhetoric. 

*Lot Ndamanomhata is a graduate of public management, journalism, and communication. This article reflects his views and is written entirely in his personal capacity.