SABC Bill withdrawal crisis and South Africa's public broadcasting future

Daily Maverick

3 days ago

The six months of silence since Communications Minister Solly Malatsi withdrew the SABC Bill is unacceptable. The Speaker must urgently gazette that withdrawal, in line with the rules of the National Assembly.
Silence is killing the SABC. For years, the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) has weathered waves of political noise, controversy, and intense public scrutiny — the kind of attention that once threatened its survival.
But today, it is not the noise, but the silence that endangers its future.
On 10 November 2024, the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies Solly Malatsi withdrew the SABC Bill in terms of Rule 334 of the National Assembly Rules, following sustained pressure from civil society organisations, including the SOS Support Public Broadcasting Coalition (SOS), and various broadcasters.
In line with Rule 277(3), the Speaker of the National Assembly was required to formally gazette this withdrawal. Six months later, this has yet to happen.
Instead, the process has evolved into political infighting. On 21 December 2024, the Parliamentary committee on communications and digital technologies issued a statement rejecting outright Minister Malatsi's decision, describing the withdrawal as both unilateral and unconstitutional.
Deputy communications minister (also former minister), Mondli Gungubele vented on X, opposing the withdrawal, while civil society organisations, including SOS, supported the withdrawal of the flawed SABC Bill.
On 8 February 2025, News24 reported that Deputy President Paul Mashatile had convened a meeting with the Speaker and Minister Malatsi to understand the reasons behind the withdrawal.
However, by 2 March, TimesLIVE reported that the deputy president, in his role as leader of Government Business, was on the receiving end of a backlash from ANC ministers after he presented and supported Malatsi's rationale for withdrawing the Bill.
To date, the Speaker has not gazetted this withdrawal, the Cabinet and the parliamentary committee have gone quiet, and the public has been left in the dark. This silence goes beyond mere procedural oversight – it is symptomatic of a severe lack of political will to protect and reform the public broadcaster.
The SABC Bill
In October 2023, former Minister Gungubele introduced the SABC Bill in Parliament. The Bill seeks to repeal the outdated Broadcasting Act 4 of 1999 and should ideally pave the way for the SABC to address its persistent financial woes, at which it dismally fails.
Civil society organisations, including SOS, raised myriad concerns about the Bill's implications on media freedom and sustainability, warning it would erode the SABC's editorial independence, entrench political interference and delay much-needed financial reform. The SOS Coalition, in a joint submission with Media Monitoring Africa (MMA) and the South African National Editors Forum (SANEF), highlighted the following concerning flaws:
Policy vacuum: The Bill is being introduced in the absence of pre-requisite policy, the Audio and Audio-Visual Media Services, and online content safety;
Policy U-turn: It proposes the establishment of a commercial board when it is clearly stated in the first iteration of the Audio and Audio-Visual policy that 'the idea of the commercial division cross-subsidising the public division has been a failure from inception';
Retrogressive: The Bill proposes that the group chief executive officer, a business-oriented executive who lacks journalistic experience, be the editor-in-chief, while overlooking the head of news, who has the appropriate journalistic background and is involved in daily editorial matters;
No funding model: The Bill promises that the minister will develop a funding model framework, but only in three years, and not a funding model, while the SABC's financial challenges worsen; and
Ministerial powers: The minister is granted powers that are contrary to prominent court judgments that specifically require protection of the independence of the public broadcaster from ministerial interference. One case in particular is the SOS Support Public Broadcasting Coalition and Others v South African Broadcasting Corporation SOC Limited and Others; SOS Support Public Broadcasting Coalition and Others v South African Broadcasting Corporation SOC Limited and Others (81056/14) [2017] ZA. In the Bill, the minister has powers to interfere with processes at the SABC and appoint board members of the commercial board, the interim board, and extend the board's term after the end of the second term by six months or until a new board is appointed.
These concerns justify the withdrawal by Minister Malatsi, who agrees that the Bill is 'totally flawed'.
The withdrawal of the Bill was within Minister Malatsi's purview, and he followed due process. The Cabinet has no formal role in this process and its subsequent involvement has caused further delays.
Following the meeting between the deputy president, the Speaker, and the minister, and in particular the endorsement of Minister Malatsi's withdrawal by the deputy president, it remains unclear why Cabinet has not yet directed the Speaker to gazette the Bill. The sooner the withdrawal is formally gazetted, the sooner the department can begin the necessary consultations and revisions to address the flaws in the Bill.
The continued silence is unacceptable. The Speaker must urgently gazette the Bill's withdrawal, in line with the rules of the National Assembly. Similarly, Cabinet and political parties must demonstrate the political will to support meaningful reform of the SABC rather than delay this reform through political infighting.
The public broadcaster is a cornerstone of our democracy and provides millions of South Africans with critical information to make informed decisions about their lives – it needs to be safeguarded and supported to fulfil its public mandate. DM