Presidential action

Ordinarily President Cyril Ramaphosa’s dismissal of the former higher education and training minister, Dr Nobuhle Nkabane, would have earned him plaudits for acting against a cabinet member who seemed not to appreciate the negative impact of her actions on the important public position she held.

Here was a minister who — on being questioned about her apparently flawed appointment of Seta (Sector Education and Training Authority) chairs — responded with deviousness and unbelievable arrogance.

From her now infamous episode of having a meal in parliament, to being untruthful about the appointment process she followed, and then ultimately avoiding to appear in the legislature to answer questions, Nkabane behaved like someone who believed she was untouchable, and unaccountable to anyone — not to parliament, and not to South African citizens.

By failing to act promptly against Nkabane, Ramaphosa may have lost an opportunity to show his seriousness in maintaining the highest ethical standards in his cabinet, and to protect its public image

Of course, the question on the public mind will be why Ramaphosa took so long to axe Nkabane while she was doing damage — not only to her own stature but to that of the cabinet as well.

The additional question is why, following her dismissal, Nkabane should remain a parliamentarian. If she is deemed not suitable to serve in cabinet, why would Ramaphosa and the ANC see her fit to remain an MP? Are we to believe that there’s a higher standard of accountability for the cabinet than that of the national legislature?

In that context, it will be interesting to see whether parliament itself will follow through on her act of apparently misleading it, which is a serious, potentially criminal offence.

By failing to act promptly against Nkabane, Ramaphosa may have lost an opportunity to show his seriousness in maintaining the highest ethical standards in his cabinet, and to protect its public image.