The recent events in our country have left many citizens wondering whether the politics of representation has provided us with the kind of public representatives we require as a nation.

The report by chief justice Raymond Zondo on the state of state capture, the allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa by Arthur Fraser and the bemoanable response by our legislators are matters of grave concern, especially as it applies to representation.

In its heyday, from the middle of the 5th century BCE to the middle of the 4th century BCE, the city of Athens's democracy meant that the citizens themselves participated in the political processes.

That political system was based on the assumption that all political power belonged to the people. Obviously direct democracy is a luxury no contemporary state can still enjoy given the sheer size of their respective populations. What seems to be a viable option is what we have here in SA today – indirect democracy in which people participate in the political life of their country by electing representatives to act on their behalf.

If the Zondo commission report is anything to go by, (it is a judicial commission of enquiry), how represented are we as the citizens by those we elected to represent us? Is governance being conducted to the pleasure of the governed?

The sooner the Phala Phala farm matter gets addressed by both the president and the relevant authorities, the better. The bearing it has on our country calls for expediency. Delaying its resolution will hamstring the president's ability to deal with the scourge of corruption in SA. Fighting corruption is one battle we have to win.

-The theatrics and violence that characterised the president's budget speech in parliament left many wondering who is actually representing us? Is their agenda the real agenda of the people of this country?

Would Abraham Lincoln still categorise ours as, "a government of the people, by the people, for the people?"

Shumani George Mukhwa, Randburg