Minister Nkabane Pressured to Reveal Identities Behind Controversial SETA Board Appointments
Mounting Tensions Over Secret SETA Board Appointments
South Africa’s Higher Education Minister Nobuhle Nkabane stands at the center of a political storm, as calls for her to expose a secretive selection panel intensify. The controversy kicked off after it emerged the panel picked 20 individuals with clear ties to the ANC for positions on boards of the country’s Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs). The government received over 500 applications, but high-profile names linked to the ruling party quickly raised alarms.
Among those flagged were Gwebinkosi Qonde, currently advising ANC National Chairperson Gwede Mantashe, and Buyambo Mantashe, the chairperson’s own son. Former ANC political heads Nomusa Dube and Michael Mabuyakhulu were also selected, making it look more like a political cabal than a skills-focused group. After their appointments were announced, an immediate wave of criticism from watchdog groups, civil society, and the public forced officials to backtrack and withdraw these names by the middle of May 2025.
The fact that the identities of the selection panel remain hidden has only fueled suspicion. Critics claim that behind closed doors, Nkabane enabled a process that ignored merit and prioritized politics, casting *SETA panel* boards as yet another ANC stronghold. With the nation already grappling with record high youth unemployment and skills shortages, these board roles have never been more crucial. Questions are swirling about how far political interference stretches in spaces meant to boost young people’s prospects.
Legal and Political Fireworks in Parliament
Amid the widespread uproar, the Democratic Alliance didn’t sit quietly. The party responded by using formal legal avenues, submitting a request under Section 14 of the Powers and Privileges Act. Their move: to force Minister Nkabane to appear before Parliament and disclose exactly who served on this secretive panel, and on what basis they chose their favored candidates. They cited Rule 167(a), which holds state officials accountable by compelling them to hand over evidence and official documents to parliamentary committee chairs—this time, Tebogo Letsie is in the hot seat, overseeing the process.
This isn’t the first instance where transparency has taken a hit. During a heated committee session at the end of May, Minister Nkabane was asked directly for details on the panel. She stonewalled, leading to allegations of dodging and disrespect. When accused of not taking the session seriously—after she was seen eating during proceedings—Nkabane said she’d done so with the chair’s permission and asked South Africans to watch the entire session rather than snippets circulating online.
A separate blunder only deepened skepticism: Nkabane named advocate Terry Motau as the panel chair, a claim Motau quickly rejected. She later apologized, but the error added more fuel to the fire for those demanding answers. The apology, delivered under mounting public and media scrutiny, hasn’t done much to quell public concern about the way these appointments were handled.
The minister’s recent failure to meet a June deadline for submitting the panel’s names to Parliament has only raised the temperature. Opposition lawmakers say it shows a pattern of avoidance and heightens worries that SETA boards are at risk of turning into political patronage clubs—undermining their mission to tackle unemployment and skill shortages. At the same time, ordinary citizens see this as yet another example of political gamesmanship coming at the expense of a generation’s future.
How this saga plays out now depends partly on Parliament’s willingness to enforce transparency. The pressure isn’t going anywhere, and South Africa’s lookout for fair and honest handling of public institutions grows sharper with every twist in this story.
Bruce Moncrieff
June 27, 2025 AT 01:05Nkabane’s stonewalling just fuels the fire!
Dee Boyd
June 27, 2025 AT 03:52The procedural oversight evident in the clandestine panel selection raises substantial concerns regarding institutional integrity. By invoking Section 14 of the Powers and Privileges Act, the Democratic Alliance seeks to enforce statutory compliance and ensure transparency. This move aligns with best practices for governance and mitigates the risk of partisan capture.
Carol Wild
June 27, 2025 AT 06:38One cannot help but notice the pattern of covert machinations that have been quietly ingrained within the very fabric of our political apparatus, a pattern that extends beyond mere appointments to a systematic erosion of democratic safeguards. The secretive nature of the panel, allegedly shepherded by individuals with direct ties to senior ANC leadership, suggests an orchestrated attempt to consolidate power under the veneer of bureaucratic normalcy. It is plausible, if not entirely surprising, that the individuals named-such as Gwebinkosi Qonde and the Mantashe kin-represent only the tip of an iceberg of patronage that has been meticulously curated over years of insider negotiations. The fact that the minister resorted to a public apology after mistakenly citing Terry Motau, which was promptly refuted, further underscores a lack of due diligence that is emblematic of a broader culture of impunity. Moreover, the failure to meet the June deadline for panel disclosure is not a mere administrative slip but rather a calculated delay, allowing the apparatus to entrench itself before any substantive scrutiny can be applied. Such tactics are reminiscent of historical precedents where ruling parties have used opaque processes to sideline meritocratic principles in favor of allegiance-based appointments. The cumulative effect of these actions is a disillusioned citizenry, especially the youth, who are already grappling with staggering unemployment rates and a skills deficit that demands transparent and effective governance. While the opposition’s legal recourse is laudable, one must remain vigilant about the potential for these proceedings to become performative, offering the illusion of accountability without delivering substantive change. In the final analysis, the intersection of political patronage, procedural opacity, and strategic deflection creates a perfect storm that threatens the very mission of SETAs-to uplift and equip the next generation with the skills needed for economic participation.
Rahul Sharma
June 27, 2025 AT 09:25Let’s look at the facts, the numbers, the timeline: the minister announced appointments, then retracted them, then claimed a misidentification-each step accompanied by a lack of clear documentation, which is, frankly, a serious breach of public trust. The parliamentary request under Rule 167(a) is not just a formalities; it’s a constitutional safeguard designed to prevent exactly this kind of opaque decision‑making, and it must be honoured. Transparency isn’t optional, it’s mandated, and the minister’s eventual apology, while necessary, does not absolve the procedural failures that have been exposed.
Emily Kadanec
June 27, 2025 AT 12:12i think this whole thing is just a big mess, the minister should’ve just been more open from the start.
william wijaya
June 27, 2025 AT 14:58The whole saga feels like a drama unfolding on a stage where the script was never meant for the audience.
We need to focus on the real impact these board seats have on training programs, not just the political theater.
Lemuel Belleza
June 27, 2025 AT 17:45Agreed, it’s just another layer of bureaucracy.
faye ambit
June 27, 2025 AT 20:32While the immediate outrage is understandable, we might consider the broader philosophical implications of a state apparatus that appears to subordinate merit to loyalty. This tension raises questions about the ethical foundations of governance and the social contract we, as citizens, implicitly endorse.
Subhash Choudhary
June 27, 2025 AT 23:18True, it’s a reminder to stay vigilant.
Ethan Smith
June 28, 2025 AT 02:05In summary, the demand for transparency is justified, the procedural lapses are evident, and the impact on youth training programs must remain the central concern moving forward.