Parliament declines to summon MacG over ‘disgusting' utterances as Minnie Dlamini consults her lawyer
Parliament has declined to summon podcast host MacGyver 'MacG' Mukwevho to explain his controversial comments about media personality Minnie Dlamini.
Mukwevho has faced backlash for remarks made on his widely followed platform, Podcast & Chill, regarding Dlamini's relationship break-up.
He made an inappropriate insinuation about her genital odour.
Government slams MacG over Minnie Dlamini remarks
The incident prompted Deputy Minister in the Presidency for Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities, Mmapaseka 'Steve' Letsike, to call on Parliament to summon Mukwevho.
Letsike strongly condemned the remarks, describing them as misogynistic and vulgar.
She further argued that the podcast host's repeated use of 'derogatory language' towards women was not only offensive, but constituted online gender-based violence (GBV).
The deputy minister urged MultiChoice, which airs Podcast & Chill through a partnership, to take action against Mukwevho.
ALSO READ: Parliament to summon MacG after comments about Minnie Dlamini
She also indicated plans to refer the matter to the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE), the South African Human Rights Commission, and the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa (BCCSA) for investigation.
In addition, Letsike's department is considering filing a case of crimen injuria against Mukwevho with the South African Police Service (Saps).
The controversy has reignited public debate on whether podcasts should be subject to regulation.
Minister wants MacG summoned by Parliament
In her presentation to Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities, Letsike defended her call to action, stating that Mukwevho's remarks reflected 'unchecked freedom of speech'.
The deputy minister contended that his 'vile' and 'disgusting' utterances violated Dlamini's constitutional rights and undermined her dignity.
She said the podcast host should be compelled to withdraw his statements.
'I will also refer this matter to the Portfolio Committee on Communications and Digital Technologies and its department thereof to ramp up efforts towards regulation of online media platforms such as podcasts to ensure that the messaging on these platforms adhere to the constitution and other pieces of legislation that govern what is acceptable speech is our society as empowered by the right to freedom of expression,' Letsike said.
READ MORE: Minnie Dlamini breaks silence following controversial MacG comments
Letsike emphasised that Mukwevho's comments were 'soft violence' and contributed to the objectification of women's bodies, promoting sexism.
'We raise these issues sharply because Mr Mukwevho weighs considerable influence in South Africa's social discourse with a following of at least 1.5 million viewers subscribed to his YouTube channel.'
She also stressed that the issue was not about cancel culture and revealed that Dlamini was consulting her legal counsel.
'She will inform us on her action if they do open a case.'
Watch the meeting below:
MPs deliberate
Later, Members of Parliament (MPs) expressed their views on the request to summon Mukwevho.
ANC MP Meagan Chauke-Adonis warned against politicising the issue, but stressed the importance of addressing it.
'Must there be physical bodily harm before this portfolio committee then responds and acts?
'This is something where once again we perpetuate a culture of cyberbullying, which we have been very silent on,' Chauke-Adonis said.
ANC MP Maakgalake Pholwane supported the committee's involvement, while DA MP Angel Khanyile warned that summoning the podcast host would be an overreach.
'When I look at this case I do believe that Saps has a role to play.
'I do believe that there's a good chance of opening a case of crimen injuria and a civil claim as well, which I also believe may bring that apology,' Khanyile said.
READ MORE: MacG's commenting goes beyond the bounds of free speech
ActionSA MP Kgosi Letlape supported seeking a legal opinion on whether the committee could lay a criminal charge, a motion backed by Patriotic Alliance (PA) MP Jasmine Petersen.
'I feel this is a crime against all women and it should be tried in a court of law,' Letlape said.
EFF MP Sihle Lonzi was critical of the deputy minister, accusing her of 'grandstanding', 'populism' and 'selective activism'.
While acknowledging that Mukwevho's comments were 'distasteful', he questioned the mechanisms being used.
Lonzi highlighted that institutions like the CGE, which falls under Letsike's department, are mandated to handle such matters.
'Have they failed to deliver on their mandates?' the EFF MP asked.
Committee won't call MacG over Minnie Dlamini remarks
Ultimately, the committee resolved not to summon Mukwevho.
'I think the majority of members are not in favour of us proceeding as the honorable minister, deputy minister had requested us to do,' the committee's chairperson Liezl van der Merwe said.
She pointed out that Dlamini had not approached Parliament nor laid a criminal case.
'I think all of you have touched on this point that if we do decide it is our mandate to proceed with hearing one case of cyber-bullying, it would mean that this portfolio committee would have to extend that to every other person because they cannot be selective in choosing one case.'
READ MORE: MacG says his partnership with MultiChoice is 'a natural evolution' despite it being criticised as a lazy move by the broadcaster
Van der Merwe said the committee had limited capacity to handle such matters.
'There are other instruments that we can utilise,' she said, adding that a legal opinion would be sought.
'We will support your complaints, honourable deputy minister, to the BCCSA. We will also encourage you to finalise your discussions with Ms Dlamini and to encourage her to open a case with Saps and to follow due processes.
'We also will support the approach and the intervention to lay this matter or to send this matter as a complaint to the Commission for Gender Equality and we think that is the right approach,' Van der Merwe concluded.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
14 hours ago
- The Citizen
ConCourt declares appointment of 5 CGE commissioners invalid due to limited public participation
The CGE acknowledged the ruling in a brief statement on Friday. The Constitutional Court (ConCourt) has ruled that the appointments of five commissioners to the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) are invalid, citing Parliament's failure to ensure adequate public participation in the selection process. The ruling follows a legal challenge brought by the non-profit organisation Corruption Watch. The respondents in the matter included the speaker of the National Assembly, the president, the Information Regulator, and the five CGE commissioners. ALSO READ: Reserve Bank unlawfully interfered in Absa chair appointment, says court Media Monitoring Africa was admitted as amicus curiae (friend of the court). Corruption Watch contested the appointments of CGE commissioners chairperson Nthabiseng Sepanya-Mogale, deputy chairperson Prabashni Subrayan Naidoo, Thando Gumede, Bongani Ngomane, and Leonashia Leigh-Ann Van Der Merwe, all of whom took office in March 2023. These appointments, for terms of up to five years, were made by the president upon recommendation by Parliament. CGE commissioners' appointment process challenged The nomination process was led by Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities. It began in June 2022 and closed nearly a month later. A shortlist of four candidates was compiled in late August, while public comment was invited between 2 and 16 September. Submissions were to be made via an online form linked through Parliament's website. The link led to a spreadsheet listing candidates' names and qualifications, but their full CVs were not published. READ MORE: Initiation schools: Commission wants answers on why recommendations haven't been carried out Despite Corruption Watch requesting an extension of the public comment period to 30 days, the removal of the character limit on submissions, and the release of CVs, the National Assembly proceeded with its recommendations to the president following candidate interviews. The appointments were announced on 25 February 2023, and the commissioners assumed office on 1 March. Corruption Watch then brought its application before the ConCourt under section 167(4)(e) of the Constitution, which grants the court exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether the National Assembly has failed to fulfil a constitutional obligation. The organisation argued that Parliament's process was flawed due to the limited public access to information about candidates, a 2 000-character restriction on submissions, and the short 14-day window for public comment. (4/4) CCT 333/23 Corruption Watch (RF) NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others August 1, 2025 The speaker defended the process, stating it was reasonable and consistent with past procedures. It was argued that the 14-day period was sufficient, that public comments were properly considered, and that CVs could not be published without candidates' consent in accordance with the Protection of Personal Information Act (Popia). However, the Information Regulator clarified in an affidavit that such consent is not required when the information is needed for the performance of public duties. ConCourt judgment In a unanimous ruling delivered on Friday, the ConCourt sided with Corruption Watch and found that the public participation process was insufficient. 'In the circumstances, the appointment process conducted by the National Assembly therefore did not comply with the obligations imposed by section 59(1)(a) of the Constitution and is therefore invalid,' the summary of the 1 August judgement reads. The declaration of invalidity has been suspended for 12 months from the date of the order, giving Parliament time to conduct a constitutionally compliant appointment process and allowing the president to make appointments. Reactions The CGE acknowledged the ruling in a brief statement on Friday. 'The commission remains committed to its legislative mandate and will continue to discharge its responsibilities while Parliament undertakes its processes. 'The commission will not make further public pronouncements or respond to media enquiries on this matter,' the statement reads. In addition, Corruption Watch welcomed the outcome. 'South African citizens have a right to participate fully in these processes, particularly where such institutions are at the forefront of ensuring justice and enforcement of human rights in the country. 'The opportunity for people to have their say in the appointment of representatives to Chapter 9 institutions like the CGE, is an important example of that process,' the organisation said in a statement. The CGE operates under section 187 of the Constitution, with a mandate to promote and protect gender equality. In March last year, six other commissioners – Seeham Samaai, Mulalo Grace Nemathaheni, Mfundo Nomvungu, Yanga Malotana, Kamohelo Rodney Teele, and Marion Lynn Stevens – were recommended by Parliament and subsequently approved by the president. NOW READ: MK party and Zuma suffer blow as ConCourt rules in Ramaphosa's favour
IOL News
20 hours ago
- IOL News
Deputy President Paul Mashatile denies misuse of public funds amid luxury property claims
Deputy President Paul Mashatile denies claims of misusing public funds, insisting luxury properties linked to him are privately owned by family. Deputy President Paul Mashatile has denied allegations that he uses his government position to amass wealth and live in luxury. Speaking at the official opening of the Inkosi Simingaye Shopping Centre on the sideline of KwaXimba near Cato Ridge, west of Durban on Thursday, Mashatile addressed reports about a property in Constantia that had been linked to him in Parliament. IOL previously reported that Mashatile is facing scrutiny for declaring two luxury properties worth a combined R65 million, despite an annual salary of just over R3 million. Among these is a Constantia estate in Cape Town valued at R28.9 million, which he previously claimed was owned by his son-in-law's company. The other is a Waterfall property in Midrand, reportedly valued at R37 million. Within a year, Mashatile has declared at least two high-value properties, including the Constantia estate he once denied owning. The declarations have intensified public debate around the wealth of public servants and the transparency of their financial disclosures. These declarations came as members of Parliament made their latest financial disclosures public through the June 2025 Register of Members' Interests. 'People must read. That's the first thing you must learn in life. There's nothing in Parliament that I said I own a house. I said I live there. That house is owned by my son-in-law. It's a very simple thing to read. So what's the problem?'
Eyewitness News
20 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
It's all systems go for MPs in ad hoc committee probing police graft allegations
CAPE TOWN - Members of Parliament's ad hoc committee investigating police corruption are ready to get started as early as next week. The National Assembly ad hoc committee investigating the allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi will meet on Tuesday as it races against time to conclude its work within three months. This week, Parliament named the 18-member committee comprising eight parties represented in Parliament. Parliament might be on a lengthy recess, but the multi-party committee is expected to meet during the break from next week. ALSO READ: - National Assembly greenlights establishment of ad hoc committee to probe Mkhwanazi claims - Parties want Mkhwanazi to expose all those implicated in alleged police corruption When the committee meets on Tuesday, the first order of business will be electing a chairperson, who will most likely come from the African National Congress (ANC). But committee member Lisa Schickerling said they're raring to go. 'We do look forward to it. It is going to be a very interesting ad hoc committee, and we really hope that we get clarity for South Africans.' The committee will start its probe in the coming weeks which will look at the nature and implications of relationships between senior police leadership and certain members of the public, among others.
