Deputy Minister of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities, Mmapaseka Steve Letsike, left a G20 meeting to face Parliament’s scrutiny over her letter asking Parliament to invite controversial podcaster MacGyver “MacG” Mukwevho for remarks he made about TV star Minnie Dlamini.
On his Podcast and Chill platform, Mukwevho implied that Dlamini’s former partner left her due to the scent of her private parts.
The statement sparked public outrage, with many accusing him of misogyny and disrespect.
More than a tasteless joke
Letsike told Parliament on Tuesday that the issue was more than a tasteless joke.
“In his comments, Mr Mukwevho insinuated that the reason behind the termination of Miss Dlamini’s past relationship is in part due to the scent of her genitalia,” said Letsike. “MacG’s statements immediately sparked a wide range of responses from his followers and others on social media.”
Appearing virtually before the portfolio committee, Letsike said the remarks reflected the dangers of unchecked freedom of speech.
She condemned the comments as “vile and disgusting” and said they constitute online violence as defined in the national strategic plan on gender-based violence and femicide.
Portfolio committee on communication
“I will also refer this matter to the portfolio committee on communication and digital technologies and its department,” she said.
“We must ensure that messaging on these platforms adheres to the Constitution and legislation governing acceptable speech.”
Letsike said Mukwevho’s influence made the issue critical.
“We are aware that as early as 2025, South Africa had approximately 26.7 million active social media users,” she said.
“We also note that Mr Mukwevho’s wide-ranging influence also could be an egregious error that we allow Mr Mukwevho’s utterances to stand without passing the acid on whether they are fit for purpose in our constitutional democracy.”
But committee chairperson Liezl van der Merwe said the backlash had already damaged Parliament’s reputation.
Backlash already damaged Parliament
“They cannot believe that this portfolio committee has acceded to your request,” said Van der Merwe. “We’ve really received a lot of negative backlash.”
She said it was important for the deputy minister to explain why Parliament should be involved.
“You have written to us to intervene in what seems to be a public spat between the podcaster MacG and the media personality Miss Minnie Dlamini. You seek our intervention and you’ve also indicated that you want to refer these matters to the South African Human Rights Commission,” she said.
“I too take a dim view of us being dragged into something without being able to express ourselves on your request.”
Letsike clarified that she was not calling for the podcast to be cancelled. She expressed that Dlamini was still consulting her lawyers on a way forward.
Minnie Dlamini consulting lawyers
“In as much as we support the right to dignity for Miss Dlamini, we also support MacG’s right to freedom of speech,” she said. “But MacG or Mr Mukwevho cannot use his right to freedom of speech to rob the dignity of others.”
MK Party committee member Mabel Reqana said it was confusing for Letsike to ask parliament to deal with issues that can be handled via the courts.
“On one side we must call Mukwevho and on the other side there will be proceedings in the court or whatever legal steps that were taken by Miss Dlamini. You want us to intervene in something being handled on the other side. Really, I don’t understand it,” she said.
Opposition parties pour cold water on suggestion
DA MP Angel Khanyile said Parliament was not the right platform.
“I want to reiterate that we stand with Miss Dlamini,” said Khanyile.
“But at this point in time we would be overreaching if we decide on this matter.”
ActionSA’s Dr Kgosietsile Letlape said summoning MacG would be pointless.
“We’ve got no powers to censure that person,” he said.
“I feel this is a crime against all women and it should be tried in a court of law.”
Patriotic Alliance MP Jasmine Petersen condemned MacG’s remarks but questioned selective outrage.
Selective outrage from Parliament
“We must not make it seem as though we only speak for individuals with influence,” she said. “Correctly so, MacG needs to publicly apologise for the statement that he has made, and for the woman that he had offended.”
EFF MP Sihle Lonzi questioned Letsike’s consistency.
“When a 13-year-old girl gave birth in Seshego Hospital, I never saw this minister,” he said. “When more than 120 000 teenage pregnancies were reported, I never saw the face of this minister.”
He accused Letsike of grandstanding.
Walking a tightrope on the issue
“The footage is distasteful. The agenda is genuine. But the delivery of the message is of questionable character,” said Lonzi. “Why is this brought to this Parliament?”
The chairperson stated that six committee members were against inviting Mukwevho to the committee. Four others said “yes”. She said one MP asked for a legal opinion before a final decision is taken.
“All of you have touched on this point that if we do decide that 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 Thembi and every Liezl and every other person.
“We cannot be selective in choosing one case,” Van der Merwe added.
“I do not think there’s a request from Miss Dlamini before us that we are considering. She has not laid any formal complaints with any bodies, nor has she approached this portfolio committee.”
Visit SW YouTube Channel for our video content
