South Africa


What the ANC deployment committee minutes reveal about how the party works

What the ANC deployment committee minutes reveal about how the party works
South African Deputy President David Mabuza. (Photo: Gallo Images / Sharon Seretlo)

As a result of litigation from the DA, minutes from the ANC’s deployment committee meetings between 2018 and 2020 have been made public. Perhaps most worrying is the revelation that the ruling party discusses Chapter 9 appointments and judges to be selected — seemingly undermining the independence required for these crucial decisions.

The minutes of the ANC’s deployment committee meetings reveal the party’s determination to ensure that key state positions are filled by approved individuals, and that such individuals meet gender and race criteria.

The 58 pages of minutes, recording meetings held between 2018 and 2020, show the ANC’s committee deliberating over individuals to fill positions in entities ranging from the Nuclear Energy Board to the Road Accident Fund, as well as top posts in government departments.

The existence of the deployment committee, which is headed by Deputy President David Mabuza and was previously helmed by Cyril Ramaphosa when he was deputy president, is no secret.

More controversial is the DA’s claim that the minutes clearly prove the committee prioritises “party cadres rather than qualified and independent professionals”.

There is indeed some evidence from the minutes to suggest that loyalty to the ANC is considered when the committee is appraising candidates. When the committee discussed the composition of the Nuclear Energy Board on 3 December 2018, for instance, it was noted that the recommended chair and board members were all ANC members.

But that is the sole explicit mention of party membership, or ANC loyalty, within the minutes. References to candidates possessing the necessary skills, experience and CVs are far more frequent. At a meeting to discuss Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) candidates in August 2019, moreover, the minutes specifically warn against flooding the department with “political appointments” rather than career diplomats.   

At other points, however, the committee seems most intent on ensuring diversity of gender, race, age and other identity criteria among candidates. When seeking to appoint commissioners for the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, for instance, the committee noted that the previous nominees were drawn too heavily from evangelical churches rather than “mainstream churches or the non-Christian religions”. For another board, persons from the Eastern Cape were felt to be over-represented.   

Some candidates are endorsed or rejected for more subjective — and sometimes opaque — reasons. The previous Municipal Demarcation Board is criticised in the minutes for being “rigid” and “not as rational as it should be”. Former Sanral boss Nazir Alli has “proven to be dogmatic” and should be removed. With regards to PetroSA, there is an intriguing reference to a “cheeky HR specialist” and “disruptive” unions.

In 2019, it appeared that some Cabinet ministers were going rogue in making appointments and needed to be brought back in line.

“The committee is dependent on the cooperation and respect for process that includes the Deployment Committee by the Ministers serving in Cabinet,” the minutes sternly noted on 8 March 2019, adding that a workshop would be held after the elections with new ministers and premiers to address “the general misunderstanding of the concept of democratic centralism”.

Those words seem to have fallen on deaf ears when it comes to Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan, who in January 2020 was hauled over the coals for apparently making an unspecified appointment without consulting the deployment committee.

“The committee made it known to the Minister that he must follow the correct procedure of informing the committee before any appointments of such are made,” the minutes record.

In May of the same year, the then finance minister, Tito Mboweni, appears to have fallen foul of the committee in the same way when it came to staffing the Public Investment Corporation and the South African Special Risk Insurance Association (Sasria).

“Process had not been followed, however, the candidates recommended were diverse, skilled and experienced,” the minutes note. “The committee on those grounds allowed the two items to process.”

In June 2020, it was Ramaphosa himself in the committee’s bad books, with Ramaphosa apologising for having appointed the Presidential State-Owned Enterprises Council without the involvement of the deployment committee — but explaining “that it was an omission due to the pressure”.

At the same meeting, Dirco Minister Naledi Pandor also had to commit to working “more closely” with the deployment committee.

Although it’s not quite clear to what degree the DA is justified in accusing the ANC of selecting candidates based on party loyalty rather than skill, the opposition party is on safer ground when it comes to criticising two revelations in particular, emanating from the minutes.

The first is the fact that the deployment committee can be witnessed discussing candidates for bodies like the South African Human Rights Commission and the Commission for Gender Equality, which are Chapter 9 institutions. This means that they are supposed to be independent bodies “subject only to the Constitution and the law”, and “no person or organ of state may interfere with the functioning of these institutions”.

The second is that the ANC deployment committee on at least one occasion (22 March 2019) is recorded as deliberating over judicial appointments. In this meeting, former justice minister Michael Masutha is recorded as briefing the committee on various judicial vacancies — to be considered by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) a few days later — and the committee then makes recommendations on its preferred candidates.

One can assume that the ANC members of the JSC proceed to advocate for these candidates accordingly when the judge selection body carries out its own deliberations.

As Judges Matter campaigners Alison Tilley and Mbekezeli Benjamin have pointed out in a Daily Maverick op-ed, this is not totally unexpected. It is likely that the JSC representatives from other political parties are similarly given instructions before the body meets.

Judicial Service Commission must be reformed to reduce the influence of political parties on the appointment of judges

But, write Tilley and Benjamin, “Only the ANC has been named as using a high-level political structure to do so, and then instructing members of the JSC accordingly.” They suggest that in general the JSC should be reformed to reduce the influence of political parties in appointing judges.

Tilley and Benjamin also note, however, that the ANC deployment committee’s recommendations for judges at this time actually almost all failed. They also stress that regardless of the deployment committee’s activities, the sitting president has sole discretion on who to appoint as a judge — and in at least one case Ramaphosa defied the committee’s recommendation.

“The minutes from the ANC’s deployment committee meeting are shocking in the brazen way that they discuss appointment to strategic positions in the government and other important institutions like the judiciary, Chapter 9 institutions and state-owned companies,” the two legal campaigners write.

But they caution that the DA has slightly over-egged the pudding in its expressions of outrage, given that the deployment committee did not actually succeed in placing all its preferred judges in this instance.  

In general, what the minutes suggest is the ANC’s increasingly desperate attempt to maintain a creaky centralised politburo which — other than being undemocratic — seems archaic, inefficient and ill-suited to the needs of a chaotically expanding modern country. One can imagine the frustration of Cabinet ministers and department officials needing to make speedy appointments on having to report fortnightly to this committee and sit through lengthy deliberations on every candidate for every significant public sector position in the country.

But the minutes are in one sense relatively benign, simply given the historical period they cover. As the DA has rightly pointed out, what we really need to see are the minutes for the Zuma era — during which period our current president oversaw the decisions of that committee. DM

Daily Maverick was informed on Thursday by ANC legal adviser Krish Naidoo that the minutes were incorrectly released, in circumstances that are still unclear, as the ANC continues to challenge the DA’s legal application pushing for the release of these minutes. There is, however, no reason to doubt the legitimacy of the minutes.

[hearken id=”daily-maverick/8976″]


Comments - Please in order to comment.

  • Charles Parr says:

    No wonder this country is such as f…up.

  • Peter Doble says:

    I would feign surprise except that state capture by the ruling party is nothing new. It controls everything, explains nothing and is answerable to no-one. South Africa is a one party communist structured racially defined country.

  • Coen Gous says:

    What started on clean sheets, the year 2022 quickly turned into sheets of fire and broken glass. To top it, the first Zondo commission report exposed the depth of ANC Cadre corruption, and a new report exposing the filth of an ANC deployment committee acting with impuity with known criminals sitting on that committee. All within 6 days of the new year. Already new year resolutions lay in tatters. The joy of seeing an inexperienced Protea cricket team winning against the current top cricket team in the world quickly faded away, as the stream of bad news simply just dominate our minds, with little hope that good news will follow

  • Johan Buys says:

    Party deployment is recipe for the mess we are in.

    Will the DA now also release the minutes of how they decide which persons from party lists get what positions in province, metro and councils?

    Pot, kettle, black

    • Glyn Morgan says:

      Merit, old boy, merit. Do you have any evidence of something else? No? Ah well, back to my sudoku.

      • Coen Gous says:

        Really, and you have proof that it is so? No? Ah well, back to playing domino’s!

      • Lesley Green says:

        DA member Xanthea Limberg, a matriculant without any relevant experience and with significant questions about a possible fraudulent claim to a degree that have never been publicly explained, was appointed to head the Mayoral Committee Water Portfolio in Cape Town for several years. Is this not cadre deployment… … ?

  • Jon Quirk says:

    The ANC’s Stalinist approach in seeking to control every aspect of life in South Africa, every appointment, seemingly in all spheres of activity, is simply chilling and very scary.

    It reveals an organisation with no morals, scruples, principles, or indeed any mechanism to reflect and self-correct.

    Such an organisation, particularly with its deep tendencies to criminality has no place in any progressive, democratic, accountable society and reflects deep racism in the heart of the party.

    Clearly the ANC believes that without this total control and meddling, black South Africans are incapable of participating in any sphere of activity that requires skill, judgement, morality and professional knowledge.

    Cadre deployment and the over-arching policy of BEE must both be scrapped immediately and a policy of recruiting the best person for each and every position again become the norm. This is a sine qua non if South Africa is ever going to shake of the criminality, corruption and mindset that is destroying our country.

    • Gerrie Pretorius Pretorius says:

      A very accurate summation of the anc, who they are (Corrupt thieves) and what they stand for (Racism and Suppression). Well said!

  • virginia crawford says:

    How many members are also SACP? The Stalinist tendencies do not get enough attention and are at the root of so much corruption and incompetence. And I’m sure there was much chatter not minuted!

  • James McQueQue says:

    When will be hear what the Deputy President has been up to in Russia?

  • Pet Bug says:

    Again, this article reveals Rebecca Davis’ stance toward the DA, rather than unpacking a deployment committee by the ruling party that has absolutely no place in a constitutional democracy. The Civil Service is that, not an ANC service.

    The author suggests that the DA “over-egged” their horror that the ANC feels entitled to select politically approved chums to SOEs – where this is entirely not in the interests of those companies, and definitely not SA citizens.

    Those chums have systematically destroyed just about every public service companies or institutions in SA:
    Post Office, Eskom, SAA, SABC, PRASA, Ports, Police, water boards, multitudes of regulatory bodies, ACSA – endless lists of companies and services for all intents and purposes destroyed. (All are basically just job agencies with diminishing relevances).

    At the root of these national destructions (with similar devastation at provincial and local levels) lies the illegal meddling by the ANC cadre committee.
    This must be declared unconstitutional and disbanded, and I am hoping the Zondo Commission will recommend this.

    The DA hasn’t over-egged anything here. Poor assessment by the author.

    • Coen Gous says:

      Not sure if you read the same article as I and others did. There is no ways that Ms. Davis in person took a negative stance towards the DA in this article. To the contrary. She was in fact complimentary in more ways than one. She also did not in person claimed that the DA “over-egged” here. She simply quoted “Judges Matter” campaigners, Tilley and Benjamin. Your assertion of poor assessment by Ms. Davis is thus totally uncalled for, and suggest you read the article properly before making a false assertion yourself against Ms. Rebecca Davis, a highly respected journalist with exceptional credibility.

    • Kanu Sukha says:

      ‘Poor assessment’ by your standards, does not make your judgement unquestionable either . At least the author sought some balance in the report.

  • Malcolm Mitchell says:

    An interesting discussion. The practice of “cadre deployment ” does in fact occur in other parts of the world. In the USA the top two echelons of public servants are replaced by new ‘governments’ . However the deployment embraces properly qualified and competent people who know what they are doing. I have experience of professional colleagues having been involved in the process and it is accepted as part of the system. On the other hand France during a period of political upheaval decades ago was only ‘held up’ by its permanent bureaucracy. The UK is similar, however the criterion for the top post seems to be the “Oxford Tripos” (philosophy, politics and economics) qualification.
    On the other hand we seem to deploy incompetent persons into top posts. The Engineering Council for South Africa (ECSA) has regulations for the identification of engineering work in terms of the Engineering professions Act. In terms of these regulations only Professionally Registered Engineers may be responsible for certain complex engineering activities. In some departments and agencies such requirements seem to be ignored in favor of ostensible political affiliation . Even at a much lower level my gardener living on land owned by the Zulu Monarch tells me that better plots are given to ANC than IFP supporters.

  • Jairo Arrow says:

    I would like to see the minutes of the Deployment Committee back to 2012 for all appointments at DG level. The devil lies buried in the details.

  • Glyn Morgan says:

    Davis wrote – “More controversial is the DA’s claim that the minutes clearly prove the committee prioritises “party cadres rather than qualified and independent professionals”. Then she mentions that on the 3rd December 2018 EVERY Nuclear Energy Board member were all ANC members.

    The fact that that is the sole explicit mention of party membership, or ANC loyalty, within the minutes indicates the scale of the blanket coverage of that requirement of ANC party membership.

    That is no small matter.

  • Rory Macnamara says:

    so what is new. the anc has stated many a time that it is party before country. these pompous asses that front as ministers and uncivil non servants have no knowledge of the task at hand. they are a bunch of tea drinkers!

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted


This article is free to read.

Sign up for free or sign in to continue reading.

Unlike our competitors, we don’t force you to pay to read the news but we do need your email address to make your experience better.

Nearly there! Create a password to finish signing up with us:

Please enter your password or get a sign in link if you’ve forgotten

Open Sesame! Thanks for signing up.

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options

Daily Maverick Elections Toolbox

Download the Daily Maverick Elections Toolbox.

+ Your election day questions answered
+ What's different this election
+ Test yourself! Take the quiz