Mantashes accused of using political links for personal or familial gain
The powerful Mantashe family is once again under the public microscope, following revelations that Buyambo Mantashe, son of ANC National Chairperson and Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, Gwede Mantashe, was appointed chairperson of a Services Sector Education and Training Authority (Seta) board.
The leak of a list of Seta appointments triggered a political storm in Parliament, with opposition parties questioning the legitimacy and transparency of the process.
Members of the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) led the charge against Higher Education Minister Nobuhle Nkabane, demanding clarity on how the appointments were made.
Critics claimed the process smacked of favouritism, pointing to Buyambo's appointment as indicative of the ANC's alleged practice of rewarding insiders and politically connected individuals.
The controversy deepened when Zakhele Buthelezi, another new appointee, prematurely introduced himself to a parliamentary committee as the chairperson of the Construction Education and Training Authority (Ceta), even though Parliament had not been formally notified.
The confusion sparked outrage among MPs, who raised concerns about procedural irregularities and the broader credibility of the appointments.
Facing mounting pressure, Minister Nkabane ultimately withdrew Buyambo Mantashe's appointment.
T his is not the first time the Mantashe family has faced allegations of using political connections for personal or familial gain. In 2021, a News24 investigation known as 'The Eskom Files' reported that Gwede Mantashe's daughter, Nombasa Mantashe Mawela, received funds linked to kickbacks involving Eskom suppliers during the Kusile Power Station project. The payments were allegedly funnelled through former Eskom executive Frans Hlakudi and were tied to a poultry venture associated with Mawela.
Although the Press Ombudsman later criticised News24 for a misleading headline that implied Mawela knowingly received 'dirty money,' most of her complaints were dismissed. The incident further entrenched the public perception that the Mantashe family had reaped disproportionate benefits from their proximity to political power.
Those perceptions were already long in the making. One of the most enduring scandals dates back to 2015, when a R631-million toilet tender awarded by the Amathole District Municipality to the Siyenza Group raised eyebrows.
The deal was linked to Gwede Mantashe's wife, Nolwandle, and implicated the sons of both Mantashe and Social Development Minister Lindiwe Zulu.
Although then-Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane cleared the senior politicians of direct interference, she referred the case to the Hawks and the Asset Forfeiture Unit for criminal investigation into the broader network involved.
In 2022, the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into State Capture recommended a criminal investigation into Gwede Mantashe himself.
The commission found a 'reasonable suspicion' that Mantashe received free security upgrades, including CCTV systems and electric fencing at three properties, courtesy of Bosasa, a company notorious for its dealings with government officials. Mantashe has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
The controversies have not been limited to state tenders and government appointments. In 2021, the Gwede Mantashe Foundation dismissed its Chief Operating Officer, Caswell Mokoena, after it emerged that a company he directed had received up to R6 million from Voltex, a subsidiary of Bidvest.
The funds were allegedly disguised as donations to the foundation. Mantashe denied that the foundation received the money, saying it did not even operate a bank account and that all support was channelled directly to its social initiatives.
For critics, the recent Seta appointments have added yet another chapter to a long history of politically connected dealings.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
an hour ago
- Eyewitness News
Ramaphosa taking Higher Education Minister to task over her attitude in Parliament
CAPE TOWN - President Cyril Ramaphosa is taking Higher Education Minister Nobuhle Nkabane to task for how she engaged with Parliament's Higher Education portfolio committee last week. She's been ordered to provide him with an explanation for her conduct and full details regarding the appointment of chairpersons for Sector Education and Training bodies (SETA). Nkabane's exchanges with parliamentarians have gone viral on social media, with her demeanour towards the committee being viewed as combative and dismissive. 'What makes a person credible chair is exactly how it is defined when you Google. In the encyclopedia, you will see what it means. Exactly that." This was Nkabane eating while responding to a question from the chairperson of the Higher Education committee, Tebogo Letsie, last week. ALSO READ: Nkabane defends decision to appoint politically connected people to chair SETA boards NKabane told Parliament the appointments had been retracted due to public outcry, and not because the process was questionable. Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya says the social media commentary on that appearance, in which the South African public has labelled Nkabane as rude and arrogant, has not gone unnoticed by the president. "The president has requested the minister provide him with a detailed report on the decorum and substance of her engagement with parliament." Magwenya says the president also expects to be apprised of the appointment process of SETA chairpersons. He says the report is being requested of Nkabane in view of the expectation that ministers conduct themselves professionally, transparently and cordially when accounting to Parliament. 'The president expects the minister to establish a constructive relationship with the portfolio committee as she exercises her leadership and accountability,' added Magwenya.
Mail & Guardian
3 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Health association takes legal action against NHI Act
File photo by James Oatway The Health Funders Association this week launched a legal challenge against the President Cyril Ramaphosa The ANC, which governed the country solely until being forced into a national coalition after the polls, says the NHI is intended to provide universal and comprehensive health coverage to all South Africans. But it has faced fierce criticism from the private healthcare sector and parties such as the Health Funders Association chief executive Thoneshan Naidoo acknowledged this week that 'South Africa needs a healthcare system that delivers equitable, quality care to all [and] we fully support that vision.' But he added: 'In its current form, and without private sector collaboration, the NHI Act is fiscally impossible and operationally unworkable, and threatens the stability of the economy and health system, impacting everyone in South Africa.' The association filed its application at the Pretoria high court, joining five other medical entities that are fighting the law. The It argued that the framework in its current form was not fiscally feasible and would also have adverse effects on South Africa's healthcare and economic outcomes. 'The steep tax increases required to fund the NHI will reduce disposable income, curb consumer spending across all sectors of the economy and may well trigger an exodus of high-income taxpayers,' it said. 'At the same time, destabilising the private healthcare sector will deter investment, put jobs at risk, and slow The association's position is premised on a report by Genesis Analytics, published this week, which showed that the 'NHI Act requires unsustainable tax increases while reducing healthcare access for medical scheme members'. It said the analysis also revealed South Africa's racially diverse medical scheme membership, in which more than 68% of members are black, Indian or coloured, and up to 83% earn less than R37 500 a month. 'The proposed NHI would, therefore, disproportionately impact working-class households who currently rely on medical schemes for quality care.' Modelling by Genesis Analysis showed that it would be impossible to raise the funds required for NHI, 'even under the most optimistic assumptions'. 'For NHI to fund a level of care equivalent to what medical scheme members currently receive, as government has indicated is the intention, the Genesis model shows that personal income tax would need to increase by 2.2 times (a 115% increase in tax) from the current average rate of 21% to an average of 46% of income.' This, it said, would push marginal tax rates in the lowest income bracket from 18% to 41%, and in the highest bracket from 45% to 68%. Building its case, the association said the Genesis model projected that more than 286 000 additional healthcare professionals would be required to fulfil the NHI vision. This is more than twice the number of general practitioners, nurses and pharmacists and three times the number of specialists. 'NHI will therefore place significant pressure on healthcare workers and addressing these capacity gaps will require significant time and investment,' the association said. Naidoo added that South Africa does not have enough skilled workers to deliver the NHI's mandate. 'By driving down service tariffs, the NHI risks accelerating the emigration or exit of healthcare professionals from the sector altogether.' The country is already facing a medical professional 'brain drain'. A survey conducted last year by the South Africa Medical Association, which represents approximately 17 000 doctors across South Africa, showed that as many as 38% of its members intended to leave the country in response to the implementation of the NHI scheme. Last month, Ramaphosa defended the Act after the Board of Healthcare Funders, which represents most private medical schemes, said he flouted his constitutional duty by failing to scrutinise its constitutionality when he signed the NHI into law. It added that the president ignored submissions that pointed to the patent constitutional defects in the legislation. The Pretoria High Court ruled in favour of the board. Ramaphosa launched an appeal, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction in the matter and erred in finding that his decision to sign the new law was reviewable. The court found no merit in his argument on the separation of powers and said the step of assenting to a Bill was but part of a lawmaking process that was a reviewable exercise in public power.
Mail & Guardian
3 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
EFF loses fuel levy court challenge
EFF leader Julius Malema. (X) The The party's application, lodged against Finance Minister The EFF argued that it was unlawful because it was not introduced through a Money Bill, as required by section 77 of the Constitution. The party described the court's ruling as 'a betrayal of the poor and the working class' and accused Godongwana's office of sidestepping democratic procedures in the management of public finances. 'Taxation without representation is arbitrary and unconstitutional,' the party said. The ANC-led government of national unity was doing everything in its power 'to protect the interests of those who continue to benefit from the apartheid economy, while subjecting the masses of our people to economic misery'. Godongwana has insisted that he acted within existing legislation. In his He added that it had been frozen since 2021, and the increase was necessary to preserve the real value of the levy in the face of inflation and declining revenue. He warned that halting the increase would result in a R3.5 billion shortfall for the fiscus, necessitating further borrowing, spending cuts or alternative tax increases. 'The fuel levy is not a new tax. It is a regulatory adjustment falling under existing legislation and its increase does not require a Money Bill,' Godongwana argued in the affidavit, adding that freezing the levy any further would compromise the integrity of the budget and limit the state's ability to deliver services. The court's ruling allowed the increase to proceed and, on Wednesday, fuel prices rose accordingly for the month of June. However, a dip in global oil prices and modest strengthening of the rand brought slight relief for motorists. EFF leader 'It is not the EFF that got rejected; it is the people of South Africa who lost. When you increase fuel, you increase everything, transport, food, the cost of living. Our people are already suffering. This is an extra blow to the working class,' he said. The EFF would not abandon the matter, Malema said, indicating that it was considering further legal avenues, as well as a legislative push in parliament to close loopholes that allow the treasury to act unilaterally. EFF treasurer general Omphile Maotwe, who has led the party's engagements on budget matters, reiterated its position that the matter should have come before parliament. 'The levy seeks to recover revenue after the courts invalidated the unlawful VAT increase proposed earlier this year. By using the Customs and Excise Act to bypass section 77 of the Constitution, the minister is undermining the democratic function of parliament and the people's right to participate in fiscal policy decisions,' she said. Maotwe said the EFF would submit proposals to amend the relevant sections of the Customs and Excise Act and the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act to ensure no future taxation could be implemented without a parliamentary vote. While the EFF's application was dismissed, legal observers say the court did not definitively rule on the constitutional questions raised, which could leave the door open for further challenge. While the government is technically within its rights to use the Customs and Excise Act to amend levies, the broader question of public accountability in tax decisions remains unresolved, constitutional law expert professor Pierre de Vos said. 'There's a grey area here. The Constitution requires that money bills originate in the National Assembly, but there are long-standing statutes like the Customs and Excise Act that give the executive certain powers. Whether those powers are now unconstitutional is a debate we may see return to the courts.' The EFF said it would use all platforms, legal and political, to hold the treasury accountable. 'We will not rest while unelected officials continue to impose taxes behind the back of parliament. The people must have a voice in every cent that is taken from their pockets,' Malema said.
