Troubled Higher Education Minister Buti Manamela has invoked President Cyril Ramaphosa’s previous appointments of Professor Hlengani Mathebula in a bid to defend his decision to appoint Mathebula as the administrator of the embattled National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS).
Manamela has been dragged to court by former NSFAS board members, who are challenging his decision to dissolve the board and replace it with an administrator. They have launched a high court application seeking to declare Manamela’s decision illegal and irrational.
The board members have further argued that Mathebula’s appointment as administrator was also irrational, given the adverse comments made about him in the Nugent Commission of Inquiry into Tax Administration and Governance by the South African Revenue Service report during former commissioner Tom Moyane’s tenure.
But Manamela has defended his decision to appoint Mathebula to lead the more than R50 billion NSFAS, arguing that the commission report did not disqualify him from holding public office. Instead, Manamela argues, Mathebula’s fitness to hold public office was confirmed after the Nugent report when Ramaphosa appointed him to the board of the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) and later as chairperson of the same board.
In Mathebula’s defence, Manamela argues that none of the Nugent commission’s finding disqualified Mathebula from public office and that no criminality was alleged or prosecution recommended against him.
“In making the impugned decision, I considered the adverse Nugent commission comments, which had been brought to my attention by Professor Mathebula before I made the impugned decision. He explained why, in his view, they did not affect his suitability for appointment,” wrote Manamela in his responding papers filed in the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, which Sunday World has seen.
“First, the Nugent commission made no recommendation that Professor Mathebula be disqualified from public office. It did not declare him unfit. It did not recommend his prosecution. He has not been criminally charged, prosecuted or convicted as a result of the matters before the commission.
“In the immediate aftermath of the conclusion of the commission, the National Assembly, exercising its statutory function under the MDDA Act 19 of 2002, recommended that Professor Mathebula be appointed to the board of the Media Development and Diversity Agency. The president acceded to that recommendation and appointed him,” Manamela said.
“Thereafter, in June 2021, the president, exercising his direct appointment authority under the said act, appointed Professor Mathebula as chairperson of the Media Development and Diversity Agency for a period of five years.
“Professor Mathebula has thus been the subject of two successive presidential appointments to senior public office by the president.”
Manamela insists that if the Nugent commission’s findings were sufficient to disqualify Mathebula from senior public office, Ramaphosa would not have appointed him twice after the report. He argues that the applicants’ attack on Mathebula’s fitness to preside over
the NSFAS as administrator should therefore be dismissed.
“Had the commission made findings sufficient to disqualify Professor Mathebula from senior public office, the president would not have appointed him, not once but twice, in the period that followed. The applicants’ submission that the same report disqualifies Professor Mathebula from the office of administrator under section 17A cannot survive scrutiny.”
Mathebula has agreed with Manamela’s argument in his supporting affidavit filed in court, also invoking his post-Nugent appointments as evidence that he qualifies.
Mathebula said the fact that no one had previously questioned his fitness to hold public office after the commission shows that the applicants in the NSFAS review case were clutching at straws.
“I have, at the time of deposing to this affidavit, been the subject of four-successive appointments to senior public office since the Nugent commission reported, on the recommendation of or by direct exercise of the appointment power by the President of the Republic of South Africa, the National Assembly, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Higher Education and Training.
“Across all those appointments, nobody charged with assessing my fitness has concluded that the Nugent commission disqualifies me from public office,” wrote Mathebula.
“The applicants invite this court to substitute a different view, based on selectively extracted narrative passages from a report seven years old and to do so without engaging with the contrary record. That invitation should, with respect, be declined.”
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya did not respond to questions.
- Higher Education Minister Buti Manamela appointed Professor Hlengani Mathebula as NSFAS administrator, citing President Ramaphosa’s prior appointments of Mathebula to defend the decision.
- Former NSFAS board members challenged Manamela’s decision in court, claiming the dissolution of the board and Mathebula’s appointment were illegal and irrational, partly due to adverse comments about Mathebula in the Nugent Commission report.
- Manamela argued the Nugent Commission did not disqualify Mathebula from public office as no prosecution or criminal charges were recommended, and Ramaphosa appointed Mathebula to senior public positions twice after the report.
- Mathebula supported Manamela’s defense by highlighting his four successive senior appointments since the Nugent report, stating no authority found him unfit for public office.
- The case challenges the legal standing of Manamela’s decision amid controversy but has yet to receive a response from President Ramaphosa’s spokesperson.
