De Lille under fire for handling of South African Tourism board dissolution

Tourism Minister Patricia de Lille’s attempt to hide behind the sub judice rule did not work when she was answering parliamentary questions in connection with the South African Tourism board.

This was after House Chairperson Cedric Frolick ruled that the court has not decided on the matter brought by the dissolved board and that she can’t discuss the merits of the case in her response.

ANC MP Sthembile Hlongo had asked about measures De Lille and her department have implemented to address the allegations of misconduct against a South African Tourism CEO and whether she could guarantee that her suspension will be resolved in the best interest of South Africans.

In her response, De Lille said she had written to National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza and Tourism Portfolio Committee Chairperson Ronalda Nalumango on September 9, notifying them that no MP may reflect upon the merits of any matter that was before the court.

This, as seven members of the dissolved board launched an urgent application in the Gauteng High Court challenging her decision to disband them.

“I have already, honourable chairperson, lodged my formal intention to oppose the urgent application, and the matter is therefore pending before a court of law. In view of the above, I suggest that an idea would inform you that the sub judice principle applies in this matter,” she said.

Frolick said the gist of the question was whether the matter would be resolved in the best interest of South Africans.

“It is our opinion that you may reply to the question without going into any details, but also indicate to you that, according to our legal advice, the matter is not sub judice because the matter has not been heard yet in court and there is no judicial decision pending on the matter,” he said.

De Lille did not contest Frolick’s ruling and went ahead to state that the interim board was briefed by the legal team to urgently look into the CEO's suspension and also implement the forensic report recommendations.

She said her department was committed to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that all actions taken by the South African Tourism board were in line with the Tourism Act.

The minister said the dissolution of the board was a necessary step to resolve lawful governance and accountability.

“I appointed an interim board collectively and in a transparent manner, and in the public interest, to deal with this matter. The board is currently actively addressing governance lapses and restoring the institutional integrity of the South African Tourism board, because South African Tourism continues to play a vital role in promoting tourism, driving economic growth, and creating jobs,” she said.

Asked by ANC MP Thokozile Sokanyile about restoring governance and financial controls at the entity, the minister said Auditor-General Tsakani Maluleke had in April raised the failure to appoint a full-time CFO and head of internal audit, which she had raised to the dissolved board.

“The board that I have appointed, the interim board, has reviewed the processes followed, and they will very soon make an announcement on the appointment of a CFO and the head of internal audit,” she said.

But, MK Party MP Noma Buthelezi said De Lille’s handling of the misconduct allegation against the CEO has raised serious concerns about her department's capacity to exercise effective oversight and ensure governance stability within South African Tourism.

In response, De Lille said the court will decide on the right interpretation of the Tourism Act.

“If there are perceived differences in terms of interpretation of the Tourism Act, that is why the matter is sub judice and the court will decide on the right interpretation. I will not go there. I am always willing, prepared, able, and committed to be held accountable by Parliament.”

Pressed on whether the disagreement between her and the dissolved board exposed deep governance failures, De Lille said an independent court of law will decide before a judge who was contradicting who.

“That is why I was very happy when the board decided to go to court, because that is where you will get the judgment and adjudication by a competent judge to pronounce on the matter,” she said before committing to abide by the court outcomes.

mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za