Just whose National Dialogue is it anyway?

The convention said people will be heard through ward-level conversations and digital app submissions, but we have not bridged the digital divide

- Lesedi Senamele Matlala

President Cyril Ramaphosa opened the National Dialogue at Unisa this past weekend with the promise that it belongs to “all South Africans”, asserting that “no voice is too small and no perspective too inconvenient to be heard”.

The convention, held under the banner “Uniting Voices, Shaping the Nation,” brought together more than 1000 delegates from about 200 organisations. But beneath this image of inclusivity lies a difficult truth: this process is not citizen-led in practice, and its planning, structure and execution reflect a top-down, state-managed initiative that is more performative than participatory.

While the idea of a nationwide dialogue is commendable — especially given the deep crises South Africa faces — the launch at Unisa revealed a disconnect between the democratic ideals being invoked and the opaque mechanisms underpinning the process. The official government narrative positions this initiative as people-led and inclusive, one that will build a new social compact from ward to nation. But the reality on the ground points to a dialogue engineered by elite actors without a credible, transparent methodology to ensure grassroots agency or citizen accountability.

From the onset, the process has been coordinated by an inter-ministerial committee and an eminent persons group, none of whom were publicly nominated or confirmed through open civil processes. Even the composition of the steering committee, a supposedly “broad-based” body mandated to guide the next phases of the dialogue, was not informed by transparent consultations. Instead, it was deliberated during invitation-only sectoral sessions at the end of the first convention.