MDDA & ICASA Board: Shortlisting of candidates

This premium content has been made freely available

Communications and Digital Technologies

25 August 2017
Chairperson: Mr H Maxegwana (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee was briefed by its Content Adviser on the process to appoint candidates for the vacant positions on the boards of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) and the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA).

Parliamentary advertisements had closed at the end of June for nominations for the three vacant positions on the ICASA Council. After receiving 117 appropriate applications, the Committee agreed to short-list and interview 15 candidates. They were Adv Cawekazi Mahlathi, Ms Natalie-Ann Delport,  Dr Mashilo Boloka, Ms Nomonde Gongxeka-Seopa, Mr Phosa Mashangoane,  Mr Peter Hlapolosa, Mr Rubben Mohlaloga,  Mr Thabo Makhakhe, Prof Sheila Mmusi, Ms Thembeka Semane, Ms Lulama Mokhobo, Mr Ashraf Patel, Mr Andrew Pheto, Mr Themba Phiri, and Ms Kate Skinner. The Committee did not decide on a date when the interviews would be held.

Advertisements for the three vacancies on the MDDA board had also closed at the end of June, and 87 nominations had been received. The Committee agreed to short-list and interview nine candidates on 5 September. The short-listed candidates were Mr Michael Bauer, Ms Sibongile Gangxa, Mr Ronald Lamola, Adv Makondelele Mathivha, Mr Hubert Matlou, Professor Sheila Mmusi, Ms Nombeko Mbava, Adv  Lufuno Nevondwe, and Ms Martina Della Togna.

Opposition parties felt that Mr Lamola, a former deputy president of the ANC Youth League, was a contentious person to fill a post on the MDDA board. Some Members argued that the integrity of the MDDA could be questioned if the appointed board members had a dark shadow hanging over them. The Committee had to be careful not to embarrass itself.

The ANC responded that they would not support anyone who did not qualify to hold the position, but the bringing up of allegations of fraud was not taking the Committee any further at that stage. There was nothing wrong with speculation, but ANC Members would not vote for anyone after the interviews if they were found guilty of any charges.

The Committee agreed that the appointments had to be filled as soon as possible, as the process to appoint members to the Board had taken too long.

Meeting report

Ms P van Damme (DA) said that initially the curriculum vitae (CVs) of candidates had not been made available on the Parliamentary website, but after a few civil society organisations had complained, the CVs had eventually been uploaded. She wanted to know why there had been delays in uploading the CVs.

Ms V van Dyk (DA) said that the Committee had advertised for three posts on the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) board, but in the meantime there had been a resignation of another member. She suggested that perhaps the Committee could include interviews to fill the fourth position as well.

The Chairperson said that the CVs had been delayed for only a day owing to the fact that personal information had had to be redacted before being made available online. The MDDA advert had been for three vacancies, and the Committee would be short-listing and interviewing for the three vacancies.

Dr M Ndlozi (EFF) proposed that maybe the Committee should take a resolution for the advert to go out again to fill the fourth position on the board.

The Chairperson said that the advert would go out as soon as possible for the vacant post.

Process for board appointments

Mr Mbo Maleka, Committee Content Advisor, said in principle the presentation was the same for the MDDA as it was for the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC). What differed was the prescripts of the law that governed the different entities, and in this case the MDDA was governed by the MDDA Act.

Dr Ndlozi said that he strongly proposed that the Committee start with short-listing Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) Council members first, as indicated in the brief, and then short-list MDDA candidates afterwards.

The Committee agreed to proceed with the presentation on the roadmap for the ICASA appointments.

The Chairperson said that the Committee would be following the order of proceedings outlined on the agenda.

Mr Maleka said that the ICASA Act No 13 of 2000, as amended, was the point of departure. The closing date for nomination of candidates to the ICASA Council had been 30 June 2017. The Committee had received 117 applications from candidates. Advertisements to fill the vacancies on the SABC Board, the MDDA Board and the ICASA Council had been published simultaneously and therefore candidates needed to indicate which entity they were applying for.

There was no policy that stipulated the number of candidates that could be short-listed for a position. The qualifications check on applicants who had studied locally would take three to five days, and international qualifications would take longer. Qualifications checking had been outsourced to Managed Integrity Evaluation (MIE). Consent forms would be sent to the candidates immediately after the Committee had resolved on the names of short-listed candidates.

Sections five and six of the ICASA Act prescribed broadly for appointment purposes. Section five referred to the constitution and appointment of members of the Council, and section six referred to the disqualification processes for candidates. Subsection one of section 5 stated that the Council would be made up of eight Councillors and a Chairperson appointed by the Minister of Communications upon approval by the National Assembly (NA) in Parliament, according to the following principles: participation by the public in the nomination process; transparency and openness; and publication of the short-list of candidates with due regard to sub-section three and sub-section six. The Committee needed to take a resolution on which part of the candidates they would publish.

Section five (1a) stated that the NA must submit to the Minister a list of suitable candidates that was more than 1½ times the number of Councillors to be appointed. The NA may invite technical experts to assist in the selection, evaluation, and appointment process of Councillors. The experts contemplated may include persons with knowledge of, and experience, in the industry; persons with legal expertise; persons with knowledge in the Information Communications Technology (ICT) sector; and academics in the field of electronic communication; or a representative from the labour sector, or a representative of consumer interest.

Section five (1b) stated that the Minister must recommend from the list contemplated in sub-section 1a, persons whom he/she proposed to serve on the Council. If the NA was not satisfied that the person recommend for appointment by the Minister complied with sub-section three, then the NA may request the Minister to relieve his/her recommendation. Following approval by the NA of the Minister’s recommendation of candidate/s for appointment, the Minister must then appoint the Chairperson or other Councillors by notice in the Gazette.

Section five (2) stated that in the absence of the Chairperson, the remaining Councillors must from their numbers elect an Acting Chairperson who would then perform all functions of the Chairperson. Section five (3) stated that persons appointed to the Council must be persons committed to fairness, freedom, openness of expression and accountability on the part of those entrusted in the governance of the public service. Councillors also needed to be representatives of a broad cross section of citizens of the Republic and possess suitable qualifications and expertise in the fields, amongst others, of broadcasting, electronics, policy, law, electronic engineering, information technology, content, consumer protection, education, economics, fairness, and any other relevant qualification.

Section five (4) stated that a Councillor appointed must take an oath that he or she was committed to fairness and freedom of expression, and would uphold and protect the laws of the Constitution, including the one governing ICASA.

Section six stated that persons may not be appointed as Councillors if they were: not South African citizens; not permanent residents; public servants of any other remunerated position under the state; a Member of Parliament (MP), provincial legislature or municipal council; office bearer or employee of any organisation or movement being of a political party in nature; had business interests or family members who would directly enjoy financial benefit from the postal or broadcasting industry; unrehabilitated insolvents; declared by a court to be mentally ill or disordered; at any time convicted in the Republic or elsewhere of theft, forgery, fraud or an offence relating to corruption, or any other offence involving dishonesty; sentenced to a period of imprisonment of not less than one year without the option of a fine, or was at any time removed from an organisation because of lack of trust or misconduct.

The process did not differ much from the process undertaken when considering the SABC Board applications to ensure public participation. The short-listing process was quite extensive and the Committee had not deliberated on when the short-listing process would take place. Tabling of short-listed candidates to the NA were scheduled during the fourth term. The Committee had not set timelines for short-listing, deliberations and tabling to NA. The only date they had was for the current meeting, which was to shortlist candidates for interviews.

Committee members had the profile of the current ICASA Council members, who were three men and one woman.

Mr W Madisha (COPE) said information had been circulated among the Members which indicated what the present councillors lacked in terms of qualifications as a whole, which meant that there were current Councillors carrying on and executing their work from the outset.

Mr Thembinkosi Ngoma, Committee Secretary, said that there were five Councillors at ICASA, and the four names that had been distributed to the Committee were the four positions that needed to be appointed. The fifth Councillor’s term was coming to an end on 1 September 2017.

Mr Maleka said that the ICASA Act stipulated that when viewed collectively, Council members had to possess certain skills and qualifications. The support staff had handed out the profiles of current Councillors so that the Committee could see what skills and qualifications the Council had and lacked collectively so that when they were choosing candidates to shortlist they could consider what skills they wanted on the Council.

ICASA board candidates

Mr G Davis (DA) suggested that the Committee should shortlist the ICASA candidates first while the information was fresh in their minds, and then listen to the briefing on the MDDA and shortlist those candidates afterwards.

Dr M Ndlozi (EFF) seconded this proposal.

Mr Davis said that according to the Act, the Committee needed to nominate 1½ times the number of Councillors to be appointed. This meant that they needed to shortlist 13.5 candidates, rounded off to 14.

Mr M Kalako (ANC) said that there was no opposition to short-listing 14 candidates.

Mr Ngoma said that the number of candidates to be short-listed was up to the Committee. It was the recommendation of names to the NA that needed to be 1½ times the number of Councillors to be appointed.

Dr Ndlozi said he did not agree with 14. He wanted the Committee to shortlist nine, or at least 12 candidates, and be efficient.

Mr M Gungubele (ANC) said that there was no prescribed short-listing according to the Act. His understanding of the 14 candidates was to create the space to accommodate more candidates by political parties so that the process was fair.

Mr Davis said that he appreciated that the Committee had a lot of work, but they should not be taking shortcuts.

Ms Van Damme said that the Committee should stick to the Act and follow the process.

Dr Ndlozi said that the short-listing process was a matter of principle, as had been done with the SABC short-listing. There was no law.

The Chairperson said that it was more practical to interview 12 candidates.

Mr Tseli said that his earlier proposal had been to shortlist nine candidates, but he was withdrawing this in support of those in favour of 12.

Mr Gungubele said that he had proposed 14 in order to accommodate efficiency and also for political parties to have a greater share.

Mr Kalako said that the Chairperson needed to rule so that the Committee could proceed.

The Chairperson proposed the Committee shortlist 15 candidates.

The Committee agreed.

Shortlisting of candidates by political parties

The ANC proposed candidates 17, 65, 91, 41, 90, and 1.

The DA proposed candidates 17, 101, 63, 67, 5, 47, and 37.

COPE proposed candidates 9, 17, 47, 65, 72, 87, 94, 98, and 101.

The EFF proposed candidates 1, 17, and 73.

All the parties had candidate 17, Ms Nomonde Gongxeka-Seopa, in common.

The Chairperson said that from the 25 proposed candidates, the Committee needed to shortlist 15.

Mr R Tseli (ANC) said that COPE needed to assist the Committee by reducing their number of proposed candidates.

Dr Ndlozi said that he wanted to add candidate 65 to his proposed list.

The Chairperson said that candidate 65 was now in common among the ANC, EFF and COPE.

The Chairperson said that Mr Tseli was being unfair to Mr W Madisha (COPE). There was nothing wrong with the COPE list, and the issue would be resolved once the parties negotiated with one another on the final short-listed candidates.

Mr Tseli agreed with the Chairperson.

Mr Gungubele proposed that the Committee proceed with the MDDA presentation so that when the Committee negotiated with one another, they could negotiate collectively for MDDA and ICASA.

Mr Davis said that it would be cleaner if the Committee put the ICASA short-listing to bed first, and then proceeded with the MDDA.

The Committee adjourned for a five-minute tea break.

Mr Tseli said that the ANC had revised their proposed candidate list: 41, 77, 90, 91, 1, 17, and 65.

Mr Davis said that the DA had revised its proposed candidate list: 17, 1, 47, 63, 67, and 5.

Dr Ndlozi said that the EFF’s proposed list remained the same: 1, 17, 73, and 65.

Mr Madisha said that COPE had revised their proposed candidate list: 9 and 87.

The common candidates were; 17, 65, and 1.

The Chairperson said that the Committee now had 15 short-listed names, including the common candidates.

Mr Ngoma read the names of shortlisted candidates. They were:

Adv Cawekazi Mahlathi

Ms Natalie-Ann Delport

Dr Mashilo Boloka

Ms Nomonde Gongxeka-Seopa

Mr Phosa Mashangoane

Mr Peter Hlapolosa

Mr Rubben Mohlaloga

Mr Thabo Makhakhe

Prof Sheila Mmusi

Ms Thembeka Semane

Ms Lulama Mokhobo

Mr Ashraf Patel

Mr Andrew Pheto

Mr Themba Phiri

Ms Kate Skinner

Road map for MDDA appointments

Mr Maleka said that the MDDA Act No 14 of 2002 was the point of departure for the process. There were currently five vacancies. The MDDA board had four Committee appointees and two presidential appointees. The presidential appointees, Ms Neo Momodu and Ms Zanele Mngadi, had both resigned. Ms Palesa Kadi had resigned from the board as well, and Mr Musa Shishange’s term would be ending on 11 June 2018.

The Committee had advertised for three vacancies on the MDDA Board. But after Ms Kadi had resigned, they was a fourth vacancy. However, nothing had been referred yet and they were awaiting the Minister’s referral, although the Committee could take a decision or resolution to include the fourth vacancy in the appointment process for the three original vacancies should they wish to do so.

The Committee had received 87 applications for the MDDA board. It was up to the Committee to resolve how many candidates they would short-list for interviews to be held on 5 September, and then tabled to the NA on 7 September.

The MDDA Act stated that in the case of the MDDA board, section four and five prescribed the appointment of members of the board and the conditions for disqualification. The board consisted of nine members, of which six needed to be appointed by the President on the recommendation of the NA according to the following principles: participation by the public, transparency and openness, and publication of a short-list of candidates for appointment. Persons appointed to the Board ought to be persons who were committed to fairness, freedom of expression, openness, and accountability of those entrusted with the governance of the public sector. Board members needed to be representatives of a cross-section citizens and possess experience and qualifications in fields such as community media, social labour,  development issues, media economics, financial management and funding, advertising and marketing, journalism and broadcast programming, media research, media training, literacy and education, media law, and information and communications technology policies.

In terms of section 5 of the MDDA Act, a person could not be appointed as a member if he or she was: not a South African citizen or permanent resident in the Republic; a public servant of any other remunerated position under the state; a Member of Parliament (MP), provincial legislature or municipal council; an office bearer or employee of any organisation or movement being of a political party in nature; had business interests or family members who would directly gain financial benefit from the postal or broadcasting industry; an unrehabilitated insolvent; declared by a court to be mentally ill or disordered; at any time convicted in the Republic or elsewhere of theft, forgery, fraud or an offence relating to corruption, or any other offence involving dishonesty; sentenced to a period of imprisonment of not less than one year without the option of a fine, or was at any time removed from an organisation because of lack of trust or misconduct.

MDDA board candidates

Ms Van Damme said that the Committee was under pressure to fill the vacancies, so it was important to put the names out for public participation. Was there any information from the President about when he intended on filling the two presidential posts on the MDDA Board? She suggested the Committee short-list nine candidates, since they were filling three posts.

Dr Ndlozi said the oversight visits at the MDDA had been very troubling, therefore the Committee needed to be thorough in their appointments so that they could make the Board alive, because it was in a shambles in its current state.

Mr Kalako said he agreed with the short-listing of nine candidates.

Mr Madisha said that the people of South Africa needed to be included in the process, and therefore public participation was very important. He agreed with the short-listing of nine candidates

Mr Tseli agreed with the short-listing of nine candidates, and said that he was of the view that the Committee needed to be thorough and not rush the process.

The Chairperson said that it was agreed to have nine short-listed candidates, and it was also agreed to have public participation.

Shortlisting of candidates by political parties

The ANC proposed candidates: 12, 18, 29, 49, 65, and 80.

The DA proposed candidates: 3, 4, 5, 30, 35, 43, 45, and 56.

COPE proposed candidates: 10, 9, and 1.

The EFF did not propose any names for shortlisting.

Ms Van Damme said that candidate 18, Mr Ronald Lamola (former deputy president of the ANC Youth League) was on the ANC’s proposed list.

Mr Kalako and Mr Tseli called for a point of order.

Mr Kalako asked the Chairperson if they were opening up the floor to debate candidates.

Ms Van Damme said the Committee had to debate candidates.

Mr Kalako said Ms Van Damme had done the same thing when short-listing SABC Board candidates, and the Chairperson should not allow this.

The Chairperson said that the Committee was short-listing names for the interview process and any issues with the candidates could be raised during the interview.

Ms Van Damme said that was well and good, but when a candidate did not meet the requirements according to the Act then this needed to be raised.

ANC members called for order as Ms Van Damme was speaking.

The Chairperson said that the Committee could not de-motivate candidates. All they could do was negotiate with other parties and arrive at a final shortlist.

Mr Tseli said that the Committee had agreed on a process.

The Chairperson said that no one was allowed to de-motivate.

Ms Van Damme asked to finish her point without any interruptions.

The Chairperson allowed this.

Ms Van Damme proceeded to say that section five of the MDDA Act disqualified specific individuals from serving on the MDDA Board. These included people who were not a South African citizen or permanent resident in the Republic; a public servant of any other remunerated position under the state; a Member of Parliament (MP), provincial legislature or municipal council; office bearers or employees of any organisation or movement being of a political party in nature. She said that if the Committee found this information during the short-listing process, then such a candidate was immediately disqualified and there was no need to go through the process of an interview.

Ms Van Damme said that Mr Lamola was an office bearer of the ANC, and was therefore disqualified. Candidate number 49 on the ANC’s list, Mr Roland Williams, had allegations of fraud against him during his tenure in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, and the she wanted clarity on whether he had been found guilty, because he could not qualify to serve on the board if he had.

The Chairperson asked why the Committee set up a process of public participation, of subjecting people to vetting process and qualification processes if they were not sure of the candidates and were questioning the candidates in the Committee.

Mr Tseli said that short-listed candidates would be made available for public participation and if there were any issues, they would be raised. If any of the Committee Members had an issue with any of the short-listed candidates, they needed to raise those issues during public participation as well.

Mr Gungubele said there was something wrong if there was an obvious disqualification. However, allegations and suspicions did not assist the work of the Committee.

Dr Ndlozi said that the Committee needed to stick to the process they had been engaging in thus far.

Mr Davis said that the Committee was on the same page. Ms Van Damme was in her right to object to candidates, and she was trying to persuade the ANC to withdraw the two candidates. What needed to be avoided was the situation that had happened with a previous MDDA board candidate they had nominated for appointment, and had then found out during the NA process that the candidate had a criminal record for drinking and driving, and the Committee had had to withdraw the candidate’s name.

Mr Tseli agreed, and said that Members would negotiate when they returned from lunch.

Dr Ndlozi asked how many candidates had been proposed thus far, and how many were common among the parties.

Mr Maleka said there were 17 candidates thus far.

Dr Ndlozi said that there was a need for consensus, especially since the EFF did not feel there were any strong candidates to propose, so they were willing to be persuaded by the other political parties who felt that they had strong candidates to push through. He said Mr Davis had been correct in relating the traumatic experience the Committee had had of short-listing a candidate and then later withdrawing after finding out the candidate had a questionable background. He reminded Members that only the short-listed candidates were subjected to the vetting process, and not applicants. It was, however, correct for the Committee to flag candidates for vetting on the basis of allegations, should Members so choose. The information the Committee had at the moment was that there were no charges or convictions, just allegations.

Mr Gungubele said that the Committee should not waste time. The political parties should meet, discuss and negotiate.

Mr Madisha said that he supported what Dr Ndlozi had suggested. The Committee should remove the three candidates that COPE had proposed. Only candidates from the DA and ANC would be deliberated, and Members could persuade him to support their candidates.

After the lunch adjournment, Mr Tseli said the ANC had revised their list. Their candidates were (18) Mr Ronald Lamola, (65) Adv Lufuno Nevondwe, (12) Ms Sibongile Gangxa, (29) Adv Makondelele Mathivha, and (80) Ms Martina Della-Togna.

Ms Van Dyk said the DA’s revised list included candidates (3) Mr Michael Bauer, (30) Mr Herbert Matlou, (35) Prof Sheila Mmusi, and (36) Ms Nombeko Mbava.

Ms Van Damme said that the DA were satisfied with the revised lists, but was still concerned with candidate 18, Mr Lamola, where the Act was specific in saying that political office bearers could not be appointed to the Board, and she wanted the ANC to verify that Mr Lamola was not an active office bearer of the ANC.

Mr Kalako said that he wanted it on record that as far as he knew, Mr Lamola was not an office bearer of any structure of the ANC. He was a member of the ANC, and he had been a prominent ANCYL leader.

Mr Tseli said that he hoped the DA had done the same with their candidates.

Ms Van Damme said that they had verified all their candidates before short-listing.

The Chairperson said that the short-list was finalised and agreed upon.

Ms Van Dyk asked if it was possible for the Chairperson of the MDDA Board to come to the Committee and address Members when the Minister was also briefing the Committee on issues at the MDDA.

Mr Ngoma read the report that would be submitted to the NA on the short-listed candidates for ICASA and the MDDA.

The meeting was adjourned.

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: