Question NW3916 to the MINISTER OF SPORT, ARTS AND CULTURE
12 December 2023 - NW3916
Mhlongo, Mr TW to ask the MINISTER OF SPORT, ARTS AND CULTURE
(1). whether a certain person (details furnished) is on a retainer at Boxing SA (BSA); if so, what amount is he paid monthly. (2). whether the service of the specified person was put out to tender by BSA; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details. (3). whether he relied on the provisions of the South African Boxing Act, Act 11 of 2001 and other relevant rules and regulations, when appointing the BSA board and other officials. (4). what are the reasons that BSA requires the services of an attorney to be on a retainer. (5). whether, in light of the fact that BSA lost multiple cases to former Chief Executive Officer, Mr Moffat Nithi and a case in the High Court to Nomfundo Malinga, BSA is getting value for money in terms of the amounts being paid to the specified person. (6). what measures and/or actions does he intend to take to prevent any legal action against Boxing SA for not adhering to its disciplinary code of conduct?
Reply:
(1), 2) and 4). BSA indicates that the person in question, Mr Masilo Charles Maake, was not on a retainer but the Board approved his secondment to Boxing South Africa for a specified period to support the Acting CEO and the Director Operations as they were new in their positions. Furthermore, BSA as a regulator did not have a legal person to assist in investigations, the establishment of panels of legal practitioners, the development of policies, and the provision of legal opinion as and when same were required. Mr. Maake is contracted to BSA. No tender was advertised as this was a decision made by the Board.
5). The context in relation to this question as that in 2014 BSA appointed an advocate and a law firm to investigate and charge Mr. Qithi in the disciplinary hearing. The specified person: Mr. Maake was not involved in that process. After the Disciplinary hearing BSA was represented by the same Advocate and Attorney at Arbitration and the person specified herein was not involved in the process at all. When the outcome of the Arbitration became known the same Advocate and Attorney gave BSA a legal opinion that the matter should be pursued at review and proceeded to file papers at the Labour Court. The person specified herein got involved in November 2020 after the death of the Advocate.
At the Labour Court Boxing South Africa appointed Senior Counsel who provided a legal opinion to the effect that the matter must be pursued, at the request of the Board. Therefore, to attribute the losses to Mr. Maake is unfair given that there was Senior Counsel involved. It is not true that the person involved represented Boxing South Africa at the High Court in the matter against Nomfundo Malinga as Boxing South Africa appointed counsel who represented and argued the matter before the High Court.
6). There is no basis for which action should be taken.