The African proverb about the zebra that told the white horse, I am white, and told the black horse, I am black, captures the contradiction at the heart of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s continued handling of Police Minister Senzo Mchunu’s special leave. While the President’s administration speaks of accountability and responsible management of public funds, the prolonged uncertainty surrounding Mchunu’s position raises questions about whether these principles are being applied consistently at the highest levels of government.
At the time of writing, it was 472 days since Mchunu was placed on special leave, during which he continues to receive his salary and benefits. Yet there remains no clear public indication of when this arrangement will end. The prolonged uncertainty also means that the state continues to maintain an acting ministerial arrangement, raising legitimate questions about the financial and administrative implications for the public purse.
Reports that the state has incurred about R2.7-million in legal fees associated with the minister adds another dimension to the controversy. This expenditure must be considered against the persistent resource constraints facing government departments, particularly the South African Police Service, which is expected to protect communities despite significant operational challenges.
Communities across the country continue to raise concerns about inadequate police vehicles, insufficient personnel and the lack of victim-friendly rooms at some police stations for survivors of gender-based violence. These are not merely administrative shortcomings; they affect the ability of law enforcement agencies to respond effectively to crime and protect vulnerable people. Against this backdrop, every expenditure incurred by the state must be justified by a clear public purpose.
The contradiction becomes even more pronounced in the context of the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement, during which the minister of finance announced plans for legislation aimed at holding municipal officials and politicians personally liable for wasting public funds. The proposal signals a commitment to strengthening accountability for the use of public resources.
However, this commitment invites a difficult but necessary question: how can the government credibly demand greater accountability from municipal officials and politicians while leaving the prolonged special-leave arrangement of a national Cabinet minister unresolved? The issue is not whether different cases should be treated identically, but whether the same principles of transparency, responsible expenditure and accountability are being applied consistently.
The financial implications may extend well beyond the reported legal fees and the minister’s salary. Maintaining an acting ministerial arrangement and the associated costs of security, travel, accommodation, transport and personnel may add to the overall expenditure. The full cost to the state should therefore be established and made public, rather than allowing the debate to focus on only a fraction of the potential financial burden.
The matter also raises concerns about the opportunity cost of public expenditure. Every rand spent by the government must be weighed against the urgent needs of citizens, particularly where public institutions struggle to deliver essential services. In policing, the consequences of inadequate resources are felt most acutely by residents battling violent crime and by victims who depend on the state for protection and justice.
The Auditor-General’s warnings about fruitless and wasteful expenditure reinforce the importance of this principle. In 2022, the Auditor-General reported that 41 national and provincial departments had incurred R1.52-billion in fruitless and wasteful expenditure over the preceding five years. Such figures underline the need for stronger financial controls, timely decision-making and consequences where public resources are not used effectively.
Although the circumstances surrounding Mchunu’s special leave may differ from those expenditure cases, the broader lesson remains relevant: prolonged uncertainty and unresolved accountability questions can undermine public confidence in the management of state resources. The government cannot afford to treat the efficient use of public funds as a principle that applies only when it is politically convenient.
Public deserves clarity
Ultimately, the responsibility for resolving the uncertainty surrounding Mchunu’s position rests with the President. The public deserves clarity on the rationale for the continued arrangement, its financial implications and the steps being taken to bring the matter to a conclusion. A transparent explanation would help establish whether the current arrangement remains necessary and how the state intends to limit further expenditure.
The zebra in the proverb changes its account depending on whom it addresses. The danger for the government is that its commitment to accountability could be perceived in the same way: one standard for those outside the inner circle and another for those within it.
In a constitutional democracy, public office is a responsibility, not a privilege insulated from scrutiny. The people who fund the government through their taxes deserve assurance that public resources are being used prudently, that decisions are made in the public interest and that accountability begins at the highest levels of leadership.
As George Orwell famously observed in Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” The President’s handling of this matter will help determine whether that line remains a literary warning or becomes a public perception of how accountability operates in government. DM
Comments
Scroll down to load comments...