Former SA Tourism board chair and deputy pursue defamation case against Minister De Lille

Two former board members of the South African Tourism have revealed that they are still pursuing legal action against Tourism Minister Patricia de Lille in her personal and official capacity for defamatory statements she made against them.

This emerged when former board chairperson Makhosazana Khanyile and her deputy, Lizelle Haskins, appeared before the Tourism Portfolio Committee on Tuesday, alongside De Lille and members of the recently dissolved board.

Khanyile and Haskins, who were appointed to the board in February 2024, resigned from the board in September last year after De Lille removed them from their leadership positions after she claimed they held 54 meetings.

De Lille told the MPs that she removed the pair following excessive meetings they held within six months to the tune of R900,000 of the R1.4 million budget.

She said she had asked that the frequencies of the board meetings be investigated, including alleged mismanagement by the board.

“This follows the resignation of the CFO, the chief financial officer, who accused the board members of interference and overreach,” said De Lille.

In response, Haskins informed the committee that their initiated litigation against De Lille was in both her personal and professional capacity for false and defamatory remarks.

“On legal advice, it was deemed necessary to cite the minister in both capacities as the statements in question went far beyond the scope of our office.

“We would also like to point out that, on the advice of the attorneys, we must inform the committee that we sought to resolve the litigation by requesting a retraction of the false and defamatory statements, a formal apology, and engaging in mediation. Unfortunately, all of these efforts were rejected by the minister,” Haskins said.

Khanyile said their removal as chairpersons was accompanied by public statements they believed were false, defamatory, and distorted facts, and caused harm to their reputations.

“The minister’s intention was to discredit us based on the work we had conducted and that we were effectively dealing with the maladministration within South African Tourism.”

She dismissed the allegation that they convened 54 board meetings to advance their personal interests and enrich themselves as false.

“The claim that 54 board meetings were convened is a distortion of the facts. There were no 54 board meetings. In reality, there were only two ordinary quarterly board meetings, and the remaining special board meetings, 11 in total, were requested primarily by management,” she said.

“These special board meetings were necessitated by urgent requests from the CEO seeking board approvals for statutory financial reporting requirements under the Public Financial Administration Act, urgent payment approvals, pre-payment requests, and approvals for the brand campaign, among other financial matters.”

She added that other meetings related to meetings with De Lille on her invitation and meetings with the portfolio committee, as well as induction sessions and committee meetings that were part of the regular functional requirements of the board’s governance.

Khanyile also said De Lille’s claim that R900,000 of the R1.4 million board budget had been spent implied recklessness and mismanagement on their part.

“The R1.4 million allocation was for board fees, within the larger R5 million board activities budget, which covered other governance expenses, including accommodation, travel, catering, board inductions, training, board insurance, and administrative requirements. 

“The claim that R900,000 was spent solely on board fees is incorrect. The R900,000 figure includes expenses for board activities such as accommodation, travel, and catering, rather than being solely tied to board fees as alleged.”

Khanyile cited increased governance interventions from the new board as part of understanding the legacy issues of South African Tourism and the board, as well as firm instructions from the portfolio committee that they should exercise governance oversight rigorously by following fiduciary responsibilities and not be rubber stamps.

“We learnt early on that we were dealing with an inept management team that failed to run South African Tourism effectively and properly, necessitating increased governance interventions from the Board. This additional oversight contributed directly to the higher frequency of meetings in the first six months.”

mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za