Jacoline Prinsloo
Maharaj
Shanti Aboobaker
Political Bureau
A public war of words erupted yesterday between cartoonist Jonathan Shapiro, aka Zapiro, and Presidency spokesman Mac Maharaj following President Jacob Zuma’s decision last week to withdraw a defamation case against the cartoonist. Yesterday the Presidency said the cartoon – showing Zuma about to rape “Lady Justice” – was a product of “ingrained prejudices” about African male sexuality.
Maharaj invited Shapiro to a face-to-face and public debate. The two were interviewed separately on two radio stations.
On Sunday the Presidency issued a statement saying Shapiro and the Sunday Times, which published the controversial cartoon, had wanted to perpetuate the image of Zuma as “a sexual deviant” despite his acquittal on rape charges in 2006.
The statement went on to say that “deeply ingrained prejudices regarding not only the president, but which extend to views about African males and sexual mores” lay at the heart of the cartoon’s publication.
Shapiro
AP
But Shapiro rejected the accusations, dismissing them as nothing but a “red herring” and adding that his legal team had intended to use the court to disprove such claims.
“This is the old, tired spin that they [Zuma and his allies] used already four years ago.
“It’s a cheap trick to withdraw the case unconditionally and all the charges, and then to trot out this old red herring.”
He said the rape of Lady Justice was an obvious metaphor and was unequivocally not about Zuma’s personal history, including the rape charges he faced in 2005.
“It’s about his bullying and threatening of the judiciary. He did it to get into power, and he’s done it since,” Shapiro said.
However, Shapiro acknowledged the sensitivities over the way in which black male sexuality had been negatively characterised historically, as well as the obvious inferences the cartoon might elicit about Zuma’s well-publicised personal life. He had deliberately drawn the cartoon so that it was “not salacious”, and so that it would not demean women.
“I’m aware of the connotation. People could make that link, but is that my fault?” he asked.
Speaking to The Mercury yeterday, Maharaj acknowledged Shapiro’s explanation, adding that he was open to discussing the issues with him.
“Let’s look at it [the cartoon] through the multicultural lens of South Africa… in an atmosphere where we can listen to each other and stop pretending that any one individual has the infallible answers to all our problems,” he said.
“Let’s create an environment of dialogue rather than confrontation.”
The Presidency said earlier that Zuma was withdrawing the charges in order to preserve a culture of freedom of expression in the country – an argument Shapiro has called “weird” and “convoluted”.
Shapiro said Maharaj believed Zuma’s legal team would have won, and therefore had decided to allow the cartoon to go unchallenged as a gesture in “granting something to freedom of expression”.
He said Maharaj was repeatedly in a position of having to “defend all sorts of indefensible things”, but that he had “never heard such convoluted [arguments]”.
“I’m adamant the central metaphor could be used for any politician anywhere.”
He and his legal team had consulted widely and had found “a number of drawings” which were similar.
His cartoon showed Lady Justice “about to be raped”, whereas in Europe there were cartoons which depicted former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi “actually raping” a woman.
“What Mac Maharaj and Jacob Zuma are doing is exploiting a very real sense of hurt – and I think they did this quite deliberately,” he said.
Shapiro said the invitation to debate was “intriguing” but that he would have to think about it.
“I’m never one to shy away from debate, but in this context we have won a total victory [with the withdrawal of charges] and they’re trying to score points now,” he said.
He was not yet rejecting the offer, but would wait to hear a more specific proposal from Maharaj.
8P9
