The top leadership of the African National Congress (ANC) has been urged to intervene directly and halt the escalating legal confrontation between party Secretary-General (SG), Fikile Mbalula and party veteran, Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma before public trial proceedings begin.
A senior party insider warned that allowing the defamation lawsuit between the party heavyweights to reach the witness stand will cause severe institutional damage.
Speaking anonymously to Journal News Network (JNN), the national executive committee (NEC) member urged the party’s top seven officials to step in immediately and resolve the dispute internally.
The call for urgent intervention follows the Johannesburg High Court order mandating that the high-profile legal dispute moves to oral evidence and cross-examination.
“In an attempt to extricate himself, this case by the SG will only be putting the ANC itself on trial. We understand that he (Mbalula) is trying to clear his name, but this court case will basically offer those who want to destroy the ANC an opportunity to destroy the movement.”
The insider emphasised that the national leadership structure cannot remain passive while public court proceedings expose internal party mechanics to hostile judicial scrutiny.
The senior official insisted that the top leadership must exercise firm authority under internal party rules to prevent an embarrassing public spectacle that damages the organisation's standing.
“It would be prudent for the ANC leaders, the top seven in particular, to call in both parties and solve this matter. The top seven can’t afford to fold its arms,” asserted the party mole.
The legal battle stems from podcast allegations made by Dlamini-Zuma claiming that Mbalula distributed money to delegates at the 2022 Nasrec national conference to influence election outcomes and secure leadership positions.
Dlamini-Zuma also linked the alleged financial payments to securing President Cyril Ramaphosa's re-election as party leader, maintaining that her statements are true, in the public interest, and central to addressing money in party elections.
Mbalula has subsequently strongly denied the vote-buying claims, challenging Dlamini-Zuma to produce evidence while demanding a public retraction, an apology, and damages.
On 5 October 2026, Acting Judge Henno Viljoen delivered a decisive judgment in the Johannesburg High Court, establishing that conflicting affidavits regarding alleged vote-buying present a genuine, material dispute of fact that cannot be resolved without oral testimony.
Viljoen restricted the upcoming oral hearing specifically to determine whether money was distributed to delegates at the 2022 conference, requiring both Mbalula and Dlamini-Zuma to step into the witness box for cross-examination.
The party insider highlighted that senior counsel, Muzi Sikhakhane, representing Dlamini-Zuma, may possibly use the cross-examination process to vilify Mbalula and simultaneously project the ANC as hub of illicit patronage.
The official further noted that even a favourable court judgment will not shield Mbalula or the party from the damaging fallout of intense cross-examination.
“The public will judge him based on the tough questions and allegations that may emerge from those questions, because obviously even if he says he himself never facilitated any bribe, there will still be that supposed inference that ANC conferences are run through channels of patronage,” he insists.
Meanwhile, ANC President, Cyril Ramaphosa, has also publicly addressed the ongoing controversy, dismissing the vote-buying allegations as rumours, while firmly maintaining that such practices must be completely rooted out of the organisation if they do exist at all.
Ramaphosa emphasised that delegates must be free to choose leaders based on the best interests of the party and the public without financial influence - framing the issue as part of the party’s broader renewal process ahead of upcoming local government elections.
Referring to the ANC Constitution, the NEC insider pointed out that airing internal grievances in public courts directly violates established constitutional obligations under Rule 25, which stipulates that: “... all members submit to internal processes. Publicly attacking or defaming other leaders violates the obligation under Rule 5.2.7 to ‘observe discipline’ and undermines collective leadership by airing internal grievances in the media.”
The public litigation between Mbalula and Dlamini-Zuma conflicts with the latter rule.
The insider further expressed strong suspicions that lingering grievances from previous internal leadership contests are fuelling the current conflict.
The source suggested that external political forces born out of past conference divisions may possibly be prompting Dlamini-Zuma to destabilise party structures from within.
“It is time for NDZ to pin her (ANC) flag to the mast as proof that she is still one of us.
“She will have to take instruction and withdraw her attack on SG,” insisted the NEC member.
The insider further referred to a historical party precedent where firm organisational discipline was applied to curb public attacks between senior members.
“Remember a precedent was set with (Bantu) Holomisa when he wanted to rubbish a fellow NEC member?” the source asked in retrospect, concluding that failure by the ANC’s top leadership to rein in both figures will leave the governing party vulnerable to self-inflicted political destruction.
