Latest news with #ProtectedDisclosuresAct
The Star
17-07-2025
- Politics
- The Star
Why South Africans are losing trust in their security forces
There is a quiet, growing disillusionment in South Africa. One that isn't expressed in protest or petitions, but in silence. People no longer expect the system to protect them — not from criminals, not from corrupt politicians, and indeed not if they decide to speak out. Confidence in the country's security cluster is in freefall, and the state's latest handling of Minister Senzo Mchunu's scandal has only deepened the sense that truth and accountability have no place in today's political landscape. On July 13, President Cyril Ramaphosa placed Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave, following explosive allegations by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. The commissioner accused Mchunu of colluding with criminal syndicates, interfering in politically sensitive murder investigations, and using his authority to disband a task team probing over a hundred unsolved political killings. The accusations, if true, represent one of the most brazen breaches of public trust by a sitting minister in recent memory. Yet despite the severity of the claims, Mchunu has not been fired. He hasn't even been suspended without pay. Instead, he's been quietly placed on paid leave while a commission of inquiry is established. And just like that, a man accused of undermining the very foundations of justice is allowed to retreat — salary and benefits intact — while the public waits, once again, for answers that may never come. The optics of this decision are catastrophic. At a time when public trust in the police has dropped to an all-time low — a recent HSRC survey found only 22% of South Africans have confidence in SAPS — the president's response appears more like damage control than leadership. And for whistleblowers, it sends a devastating message: the system doesn't just fail to protect you; it may actively reward those who put you in danger. This isn't a theoretical issue. Whistleblowers in South Africa operate in one of the most hostile environments in the democratic world. Those who expose corruption or criminal wrongdoing often face threats, intimidation, legal harassment, or even death. Babita Deokaran's assassination in 2021 was not just a tragedy — it was a signal that speaking out in this country can be a death sentence. Since then, government promises to strengthen whistleblower protection laws have amounted to little more than lip service. Draft proposals to reform the Protected Disclosures Act have yet to materialise into action. Civil society groups have repeatedly called for a comprehensive system that includes safe housing, financial support, legal assistance, and psychological care for whistleblowers. But those calls continue to go unanswered. Now, in the wake of the Mchunu scandal, the stakes have never been clearer. If a police minister can be accused of sabotaging investigations and remain in office, even temporarily, what hope is there for those who come forward with information that implicates people in power? A judicial commission, led by acting deputy-chief Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, has been tasked with investigating the allegations. Its scope includes not just Mchunu's conduct, but broader issues of interference in the justice system by political actors. It is a necessary process, and if handled with urgency and transparency, it could restore some faith in the rule of law. But South Africans have seen this play before. Commissions that take months, sometimes years, to deliver findings. Recommendations that gather dust. Promises that fade into the next news cycle. The danger isn't just that whistleblowers will stop coming forward. It's that the public will stop caring. When accountability becomes a performance, people turn away. When justice is delayed indefinitely, it begins to resemble impunity. Ramaphosa came into office promising to clean up the state, rebuild trust, and restore integrity to public office. However, his leadership has often favoured caution over conviction. Political stability has come at the expense of moral clarity. At this moment, South Africans don't need another commission. They need a firm, unambiguous stand — a declaration that those who compromise justice will not be protected by proximity to power. It's not too late. The president can still act decisively. He can remove Mchunu from his position, demand expedited action from the inquiry, and push forward urgent reforms to protect whistleblowers. These are not radical demands — they are the minimum standard in any functioning democracy. The next whistleblower is out there. They might be a municipal clerk, a junior accountant, a medical officer, or a police officer with a conscience. They're watching the Mchunu case unfold. They're reading the silence. And they're asking themselves one very human question: is it worth it? Right now, the answer is uncertain. But if the president and his Cabinet fail to act swiftly and honestly, the silence that follows won't be peaceful — it will be the silence of a society giving up. *Mayalo is an independent writer and analyst. The views expressed are not necessarily those of IOL and Independent Media
The Citizen
09-07-2025
- Business
- The Citizen
FSCA issued fines to the value of almost R200 million last year
The FSCA is an independent institution established to ensure a fair and stable financial market where consumers are informed and protected. The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) issued fines for various contraventions of financial laws last year to the value of almost R200 million, with an increase of 59% in new cases between 1 April last year and 31 March this year. According to the FSCA Regulatory Actions Report, the authority debarred 131 people, issued 107 public warnings, referred 14 enforceable undertakings to the police, finalised 633 investigations, suspended 24 licences, withdrew 382 licences and issued 13 directives. This was the third edition of the report, which aims to advance the FSCA's strategic objective of upholding confidence and integrity in the financial sector by increasing the visibility of enforcement activities, deterring misconduct, and raising awareness of regulatory requirements. The report also reflects the FSCA's ongoing efforts to embed the principles of Treating Customers Fairly across the sector and to take firm action against misconduct. These efforts are essential to building and maintaining trust in financial institutions and markets. ALSO READ: FSCA fines Middelburg insurance broker R1 million and debars her for 15 years FSCA protects integrity of financial institutions Gerhard Van Deventer, divisional executive for enforcement at the FSCA, says to support these objectives, the FSCA implemented mechanisms aligned with the Protected Disclosures Act and ensuring confidentiality and anonymity where required, including a dedicated whistle-blower hotline, a protected disclosure protocol and flexible reporting channels to facilitate the submission of information to enforcement teams. Van Deventer says financial customers must be able to rely on the integrity of licensed institutions, and the FSCA acts decisively where conduct poses material risks, as reflected in the number of debarments and licence withdrawals. Cases involving unregistered insurance business increased by more than 134%, with most linked to the funeral parlour sector, Van Deventer says. The report details a range of enforcement actions, including the imposition of 51 administrative penalties amounting to R119 829 523. R82 443 540 was imposed for contraventions of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, while a total of R68 million was imposed on the investigated parties in the N-e-FG matter, where funds were invested without the consent of clients. Penalties of another R16 985 000 were imposed for contraventions of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act for failing to implement measures to stop money laundering and terrorist financing. ALSO READ: FSCA fines 2 pension fund bosses R30 million each, debars them for 30 years FSCA's key objective to protect financial customers Van Deventer says the FSCA's key objective is the protection of financial customers, and therefore, 131 individuals were debarred, mostly for dishonest conduct and false policies. 'This marks a decline from the previous period, likely due to targeted interventions and greater public visibility.' Suspensions and withdrawals of licences were done to protect financial customers. Van Deventer says the FSCA can suspend a license where the non-compliance can be remedied, and the number of suspended licences decreased significantly, while licence withdrawals, on the other hand, increased markedly. 'This shift is primarily due to the process cycle for suspensions and withdrawals related to the non-submission of statutory returns. Over 90% of licence withdrawals were due to non-submission of returns, while the rest were linked to serious misconduct.' Van Deventer says contraventions of the Financial Sector Regulation Act, including impersonation of FSCA personnel and unlawful association, are part of a growing global trend in online harm. ALSO READ: FSCA's Regulatory Actions Report shows impressive numbers of enforcement FSCA identified these risk areas with heightened risk He points out that the report underscores several heightened risk areas that will inform the FSCA's enforcement priorities in the year ahead: Online harm, including social media scams, signal providers and finfluencers. Misuse of financial licences to front unauthorised operations. Regulatory examination fraud. Misleading advertising and inappropriate product claims. Non-compliance with AML/CFT risk and control frameworks. Since crypto has been recognised as a financial product, a dedicated investigation team has been investigating unlicensed crypto traders. By 12 May this year, the FSCA received 453 licence applications, with 264 approved, 109 voluntarily withdrawn, and 11 declined. The FSCA launched 36 crypto investigations and closed 21, while 15 are ongoing.
Scoop
23-06-2025
- Scoop
Increase In Awareness Of Whistleblowing Legislation
Awareness is at an all-time high of the law that allows people to report serious wrongdoing in the workplace and provides protection to whistleblowers. Today is World Whistleblowing Day and the Office of the Ombudsman has released an annual poll that shows 36 percent of people know about the Protected Disclosures Act. That's an increase of 11 percent since 2024. Chief Ombudsman John Allen says his office has also seen a significant rise in protected disclosures since the new Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act came into force in 2022. "This survey reflects what my office is seeing when we are out and about in communities around New Zealand. There is very high interest in the Protected Disclosures Act and how to make a protected disclosure, particularly amongst Māori, Pasifika and Asian communities. "People are using this Act more and more. My office has seen more than a 300 percent increase in protected disclosures matters since the amended Act came into force. This may be because the revised Act expands the definition of serious wrongdoing and offers more avenues for reporting and protection. "Other factors could include an increase in news coverage of whistleblowing cases and it may be that changes in society have prompted workers to become more aware of their rights and protections." Thirty one percent of those surveyed said they had witnessed serious wrongdoing at work, and of those who had witnessed it 50 percent said they reported it. That's an increase of nine percent on the previous year in people reporting serious wrongdoing that they had witnessed. Advertisement - scroll to continue reading A solid majority - 84 percent - stated they would report it to their employer if they witnessed serious wrongdoing. However, just under half (48 percent) thought they would be safe to do so. Of those who would not feel safe, an increasing number of people said they were afraid of losing their job (61 percent). Almost half of those who would not feel safe (44 percent) also thought they would face retaliation. Almost half of those surveyed (49 percent) said they would feel safer reporting serious wrongdoing if they were assured of anonymity and confidentiality. This demonstrates how important it is for workplaces to have effective processes in place to encourage employees to speak out, protect them from retaliation, and keep their identities confidential. The Office of the Ombudsman has released new guidance aimed at businesses and workplaces that receive protected disclosures:
Daily Maverick
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Whistle-blowers are not impimpis, they are defenders of democracy
We can, and must, become a country that not only protects whistle-blowers, but celebrates them. Whistle-blowers are the lifeline of the future of this country and we owe them more than silence. ' South Africa has the best Constitution in the world. Now, we need the best whistle-blower protection law in the world' – former Chief Justice Raymond Zondo With corruption still rife in a country emergent from the grips of State Capture, the urgency to protect whistle-blowers has never been greater. Despite having one of the most progressive whistle-blower protection laws on the continent, significant gaps in South Africa leave those who bravely speak truth to power vulnerable to retaliation, including legal harassment, financial ruin, reputational damage and, in severe instances, even death. Whistle-blowing is an essential part of any anti-corruption toolkit. It saves public funds, protects the environment, promotes democratic values, curbs human rights abuses and saves lives. Protecting whistle-blowers is an absolute necessity. Earlier this year, the Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa and the National Anti-Corruption Advisory Council brought together a cross-section of legal experts, whistle-blowers, public officials and civil society actors in Cape Town to confront the harsh realities faced by those who risk everything to expose corruption. The conference sought to reimagine South Africa's approach to whistle-blower protection and the outcome was clear: South Africa's whistle-blower law, the Protected Disclosures Act, is no longer fit for purpose. As the Department of Justice embarks on revising the law to protect whistle-blowers, as a collective, we need to consider what any amendment should look like. Real protection demands imaginative, forward-thinking legislation. A vision for reform While the government prepares to table the new Whistleblower Protection Bill, there is an unprecedented opportunity to align South Africa's legislation with international frameworks and, most importantly, realities on the ground. But we've seen legislation passed with great acclaim, only to be toothless in execution. This time, we can't afford to fail. To better protect whistle-blowers, several key changes are needed. First, an Independent Whistleblower Authority should be established. This body would offer legal advice, investigate retaliation, provide support services and coordinate with other agencies. It must be transparent, well-resourced and free from political influence. The requirement to prove 'good faith' must be removed. Whistle-blower protection should be based on the public interest of the disclosure, not personal motives. Moreover, if a whistle-blower suffers harm after making a protected disclosure, it should be presumed to be retaliation and the accused bear the burden of proving otherwise. Criminal penalties should also apply to those who breach confidentiality, and, crucially, retaliation against whistle-blowers needs severe penalties. Protections must further extend to include not only employees but also citizens, journalists, civil society organisations and others who support whistle-blowers, such as investigators and family members. Vitally, financial support should be meaningful. Whistle-blowers need to be rewarded and, at the very least, a publicly managed fund should cover legal fees, relocation costs and psychosocial support. Reframing the narrative Perhaps equally important is the need to change the way we talk about whistle-blowers. We can, and must, become a country that not only protects whistle-blowers, but celebrates them. Whistle-blowers are stepping in where institutions have failed. They're exposing rot in procurement processes, revealing collusion between business and politics and defending our democracy. Whistle-blowers are the lifeline of the future of this country and we owe them more than silence. Even the best law will fail if the culture remains one of stigma and fear. The word ' impimpi ' still echoes in our collective consciousness, but whistle-blowers are not informants – they are defenders of the public good. We must tell new stories in our classrooms, boardrooms and in our communities that celebrate courage and integrity. Honouring ethical behaviour, not punishing it, is paramount. South Africa has already shown the world what constitutional courage looks like. In the post-apartheid era we built one of the most admired constitutions in history. Now, as corruption threatens to erode the moral foundation of our democracy, we must show that same courage again. Constitutionalising whistle-blower protection? One of our strongest calls at the conference was the urge to go a step further: to enshrine whistle-blower protection into the Constitution itself. This is not a symbolic gesture. Constitutionalisation would send an unequivocal message: whistle-blowing is not just a personal risk, but a public service. It would elevate the act of speaking out to a constitutional right and duty, protected at the highest level of law. Former Chief Justice Raymond Zondo echoed this sentiment, arguing that constitutional recognition would help end the stigma of whistle-blowers as snitches, build trust in institutions and make South Africa a global leader in anti-corruption reform. What is clear is that South Africa needs more than a good law. We need a landmark law – one that closes legal gaps, provides real protection and reflects our democratic values. This isn't just about policy. It's about lives, and the type of country we aspire to be. If we want to stop corruption before it festers, if we want a democracy that works for everyone, we must protect those who shine a light in the darkness. Whistle-blowers have done their part, it's time for legislators to do theirs. DM William Bourdon is chair of the Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa (PPLAAF) and a lawyer and member of the Paris bar. He is the advocate of whistle-blowers Edward Snowden, Hervé Falciani (Swissleaks) and Antoine Deltour (Luxleaks). He was secretary-general of the International Federation for Human Rights from 1995 to 2000. Gemma-Maé Hartley is the regional project officer for PPLAAF Southern Africa. She has a master ' s degree in political and international studies from Rhodes University, specialising in human rights. She has been accompanying whistle-blowers across the continent for a number of years.
The Citizen
20-05-2025
- Business
- The Citizen
Is someone sabotaging Absa? Senior managers face disciplinary action for leaking information
A few senior staff members face disciplinary action for leaking confidential company information. If the walls at Absa could speak, there would be a better understanding of what is happening at the bank's top management. Since the walls cannot speak, an independent report had to do the talking. It revealed that some senior managers are involved in leaking Absa's information, prompting the bank to take disciplinary action against the individuals. In recent years, Absa has been known for its leadership instability, marked by frequent changes in chief executive officers (CEOs) since 2019. This year alone, the bank has announced it will be getting a new CEO and a new chairman of the board. There have been reports that suggest former CEO Arrie Rautenbach's early retirement and the leaked information are related. However, Absa told The Citizen this is not true. Rautenbach left for the reasons stated in the Stock Exchange News Services(SENS) announcement dated 19 August 2024. ALSO READ: Absa and Standard Bank raised their minimum salaries for 2025 – here's the new pay Leaked information Absa confirmed to The Citizen on Monday that it has commissioned an independent investigation, which included the leaking of confidential company information in its scope. To ensure its impartiality, the investigation was conducted by ENS Forensics, an independent third-party forensic firm. 'The investigation has concluded that there is prima facie evidence of serious misconduct, which will be presented in a formal disciplinary enquiry in accordance with proper protocols and procedures, including being chaired by an independent senior counsel.' Information leaked outside official channels Absa added that none of Absa's established whistleblower channels were used, and at no point did the employees involved identify themselves as whistleblowers or indicate they were making protected disclosures as defined by the Protected Disclosures Act or Absa's policy, 'despite having the opportunity to do so'. 'We value the critical importance of whistleblowers in maintaining organisational integrity and have robust protections in place for any individual who comes forward with legitimate concerns. 'Our employees have access to multiple secure channels through which they can report issues confidentially or completely anonymously, including an independently managed external facility operated by one of the big four audit firms to ensure impartiality and trust.' Absa did not disclose how the information was leaked. ALSO READ: Former customer charges Absa with perjury and defamation What information was leaked? The bank stated that a few senior staff members are involved in the disciplinary action. 'Absa is following its internal disciplinary process. It would not be fair or appropriate to speculate about the outcome of the enquiry and any subsequent actions.' The bank further stated it is bound by its commitment to strict confidentiality and will not provide additional commentary on the specifics of this case. TimesLIVE reported earlier in May that Rautenbach's departure from the bank may not be what Absa initially stated. It is suggested that a leak of important information may have led to the former CEO's early retirement. Leadership instability Absa has undergone significant changes since the departure of its long-serving CEO, Maria Ramos, in 2019. Since then, the bank has had six interim and permanent CEOs, which raises the question, 'What is going on at Absa?' The latest to be appointed as CEO is Kenny Fihla, the former deputy CEO of Standard Bank. He will commence his duties on 17 June 2025. Will he last longer than other CEOs since Ramos' departure? The latest prominent figure to go on early retirement is Sello Moloko, the bank's chairman. Absa said Moloko is stepping down to focus on his family, personal business interests, and community commitments. NOW READ: Do you still need cash? Banks closing ATMs, except Capitec
