Recommendation of candidates to serve on SABC Board and ICASA Council; Discussion on SABC Board Governance Issues

Meeting report

Opening Statement
The Chairperson informed the Committee that the first item on the agenda was the appointment of a board member to the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) board. There was one vacancy that had to be filled. 

The second matter was in relation to the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) council. There were three vacancies that had to be filled.

He stated that the Committee also had to discuss the way forward for the SABC board. This related to the presentation that the Committee received yesterday by the SABC board and Adv Cawe Mahlati.

He reminded the Committee that a post had been advertised to fill a vacancy in the MDDA. There was one more vacancy that had to be filled in the MDDA. The Committee was seeking legal advice from Parliament's legal team. The post might have to be re-advertised; however, the interviews would have to be done at the same time.

Deliberations on SABC Board Member Selection
The Chairperson informed the Committee that a recommendation had to be sent to the President regarding who the Members wanted to see appointed to the SABC board. He stated that the task team had met and deliberated on the matter. However, there was not complete agreement on the recommendation. Other parties felt otherwise, but majority of the parties – ANC, COPE and the IFP - indicated their support of the recommendation of Ms Noluthando Primrose Gosa to serve on the SABC board. Her appointment would be to finish the remainder of the current SABC board term.  He also noted that the DA had already said that it was not going to support the recommendation.

The Chairperson noted by a raise of hands that all Members except the two DA Members were in favour of Ms Gosa's appointment. They would be making a declaration in the House.

He noted that Ms A Muthambi (ANC) moved for the adoption of the recommendation report, which was seconded by Ms J Killian (COPE).

Deliberations on ICASA Council Appointments
The Chairperson said that the task team met yesterday and today to discuss the matter of appointing councillors to the ICASA council. The deliberations had been very productive. It was noted that for every vacancy, one and a half names had to be submitted to the Minister. This meant that the Minister had to consider five names put forward by the Committee, and of those five, three would be selected to fill the vacancies. He noted that the task team had discussed the matter and a general consensus on the names had not been reached.

The Chairperson stated that the five nominations were:
Ms Nomvuyiso Batyi
Mr Mkhululi Boqwana
Ms Nomonde Gongxeka
Mr Manyara Rubben Mohlaloga
Ms Katharina Pillay

The Chairperson noted that there were some names that all the Members agreed with, but there were others than some Members had disagreed with. He noted that Members had to vote per candidate:
Ms Nomvuyiso Batyi – All Members in favour
Mr Mkhululi Boqwana – All Members in favour
Ms Nomonde Gongxeka – 8 Members in favour, three against (Two DA and COPE)
Mr Manyara Rubben Mohlaloga – 8 Members in favour, three against (Two DA and COPE)
Ms Katharina Pillay – All Members in favour

Mr G Schneemann (ANC) moved for the adoption of the report. Ms S Tsebe (ANC) seconded the adoption.

The Chairperson noted that the DA and COPE were not entirely in favour of the recommendations.

Mr Schneemann informed the Committee that the programme whip had been informed of the adoption of the SABC and ICASA reports. At this stage, it looked like the reports would be taken to the House the next day.

Deliberations on the Presentation Received from the SABC Board and Adv Cawe Mahlati
Ms Muthambi stated that the matter had to be considered urgently before the SABC board became completely unstable. Because of the sensitivity of the matter, it had to be looked at holistically. Adv Cawe Mahlati also had to submit the presentation she made yesterday to the Committee in writing. This would be considered over the next two weeks.

Ms Killian proposed that the Committee should speak to Parliament's legal section regarding the procedure that it should follow if an inquiry was to be made. The Committee needed guidance in terms of how the National Assembly was involved.

Ms M Shinn (DA) agreed with Ms Killian, saying that legal advice was needed especially since presentations from the board and Adv Mahlati needed a fair amount of interrogation if the Committee was going to get to the “truth of the matter”. This will require specialised legal help in deciding the way forward, especially if there was going to be an inquiry.

Dr Barbara Loots, Parliamentary Legal Advisor, explained that they were not procedural experts; they were legal experts but the understanding was that there should be a House consideration and referral on the matter. It was recommended that the Committee receive formal procedural advice on what the rules were. The Broadcasting Act did not say what the procedure was for due enquiry. But the rules had to apply – each party had to have an equal opportunity to state their case. Witnesses may also be called in.

Dr Loots stated that the legal team identified two ways that the Committee could proceed. The Committee could conduct an inquiry itself through the House, or there was a possibility in terms of the Public Audit Act that the Committee could ask the Auditor-General to do a special audit on the board. There was an option for when the National Assembly started the due enquiry process, to suspend board members from office from the start of the proceedings. The Committee could recommend such a suspension depending on the circumstances. This could be seen as a preventative measure, not a punitive one. If the Committee opted for the Auditor-General route, it would still need to get permission from the House.

Ms Killian commented that it was an “odorous responsibility” to almost have to act like a judge. It was important for the Committee to establish a credible record of due process. She pointed out that because the Committee was not the appointing body-the President was- it could therefore not suspend anyone. She proposed that the Committee receive the necessary documentation from the SABC board and Adv Mahlati, and that Members examine them. In the mean time, the Committee should also receive the necessary documentation from the legal section. By the time the Committee returned on 9 October 2012, it should have received all the documentation. Members can decide how to inform the National Assembly to proceed on the matter once they have all the information.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee still needed the written submissions from both parties. It would ask the SABC to forward the documents to the Committee. He noted that the Committee was not in a position to decide how to proceed on the matter. They would wait for the necessary documentation first. If there was a need for a special Committee meeting during the constituency period, then Members would be called in.

The Chairperson noted that this was the last meeting until 9 October 2012. He asked Members to look at the documents during their constituency period.

Ms Killian suggested that the Committee ask the researcher to give the Committee a bit of a briefing on the upcoming BRRR reports so Members could recap. This would help the Committee remember what the issues were from previous years so they could hone in on the important problems straight away.

The Chairperson replied that this could be done. They Committee could fit the presentation in on 9 October 2012. 
 
The meeting was adjourned.