Latest news with #specialleave
Mail & Guardian
a day ago
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Ramaphosa's gambit on KwaZulu-Natal tightrope
President Cyril Ramaphosa. Photo: FIle Senzo Mchunu has been placed on special leave pending a judicial commission of inquiry into allegations with national security implications. Despite the veneer of procedural propriety the announcement was anything but benign. 'Special leave' is neither a definitive sanction nor exoneration, but an unease to placate critics while preserving political capital. Ramaphosa, often accused of dithering, was again simply kicking for touch down the treacherous road of South African politics. The week-long delay in any meaningful statement about the KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner, Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's damning allegations of corruption against Mchunu lays bare the fault lines of a presidency perpetually teetering on the edge of survival, particularly in the treacherous context of KwaZulu-Natal. The president was in a serious predicament. Mchunu is no ordinary minister. He backed Ramaphosa in the heavy contestation for president of the ANC in 2017. Mchunu, as a former premier and MEC is a lynchpin in the ANC's precarious hold on KwaZulu-Natal, a province where political loyalties are a brisk trade. Mchunu's influence, particularly north of the Tugela River, where the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) holds sway, is a rare asset for the ANC. His political clout in this region, coupled with his role as police minister, has made him a figure Ramaphosa cannot easily discard. Yet, Mchunu's alleged indiscretions — details of which remain shrouded in the opaque language of 'national security' — have forced Ramaphosa's hand. The president's hesitation to act decisively speaks volumes about the delicate balance he must strike, not least because Mchunu holds a sword over Ramaphosa's own head — the Phala Phala scandal. Had the police minister pursued those allegations with zeal, Ramaphosa might have faced the real prospect of criminal prosecution. The president's decision to place Mchunu on special leave, rather than sack him outright, hints at a quid pro quo, a tacit acknowledgment of mutual vulnerabilities. This is not the politics of principle but of survival, a grim reminder that in South Africa's corridors of power, loyalty is often a currency more valuable than integrity. Ramaphosa's reluctance to wield the axe betrays his fear that alienating Mchunu could unravel the ANC's fragile grip on KwaZulu-Natal. KwaZulu-Natal is a microcosm of South Africa's fractured polity, where opportunism and patronage reign supreme. The province defies the neat analyses of political scientists. Former president Jacob Zuma looms large over its rural hinterlands and urban centres. His uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party, a belligerent force, threatens to erode the ANC's dominance in the provincial legislature and key municipalities, including the metropolitan prize of eThekwini. With municipal elections in 2026, Ramaphosa cannot afford to destabilise the ANC's already shaky foundations. A slip below 30% in the polls — a threshold the ANC has not crossed since 1994 — would signal not just an electoral defeat but the likely end of the party as a political force of any consequence. Ramaphosa knows that any misstep in KwaZulu-Natal could hasten its demise. The province's politics is a marketplace of competing interests, where loyalty is transactional and power is a prize to be bartered. Ramaphosa's lieutenants in the province are few and far between, their reliability questionable. Mchunu's value lies not just in his political acumen but in his ability to navigate this treacherous terrain, particularly in the IFP-dominated north. By placing him on special leave, Ramaphosa has opted for a half-measure, a gesture that avoids burning bridges while signalling a tepid commitment to anti-corruption. This decision is prevarication dressed up as pragmatism. The judicial commission of inquiry, like so many before it, risks becoming a theatre of delay, a mechanism to deflect public outrage while allowing the status quo to persist. What does this mean for South Africa? Ramaphosa's gambit is a microcosm of the broader malaise afflicting the nation's politics. The ANC, once a stellar liberation movement, is now a machine of patronage, its ideals eroded by the exigencies of power. In KwaZulu-Natal, where the stakes are highest, Ramaphosa's indecision risks ceding ground to forces that thrive on chaos. The 2026 municipal elections will be a litmus test, not just for the ANC but for Ramaphosa's fragile legacy. Dr Imraan Buccus is research associate at ASRI and at the University of the Free State.
Mail & Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Doubt on ANC leaders in KZN
In the dog box: Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, who comes from KwaZulu-Natal, has been put on 'special leave' by President Cyril Ramaphosa. Photo: Delwyn Verasamy The provincial police commissioner's allegations against the police minister and the higher education minister's Seta appointments have undermined their reputations This content is restricted to subscribers only . Join the M&G Community Our commitment at the Mail & Guardian is to ensure every reader enjoys the finest experience. Join the M&G community and support us in delivering in-depth news to you consistently. Subscription enables: - M&G community membership - independent journalism - access to all premium articles & features - a digital version of the weekly newspaper - invites to subscriber-only events - the opportunity to test new online features first Already a subscriber?
Mail & Guardian
4 days ago
- Politics
- Mail & Guardian
Special leave or velvet-glove suspension? A trend in the public sector
Police Minister Senzo Mchunu has been placed on 'special leave'. What does this mean in law? In recent weeks, South Africa has witnessed two high-profile figures, the minister of police and the chief executive of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), being placed on what is termed 'special leave'. Although cabinet ministers are not employees for the purposes of the Labour Relations Act, this raises the question of whether this concept of 'special leave' is just suspension dressed in a velvet glove or whether it carries a different meaning in law and in practice. This article does not analyse the legality of, nor provide commentary on the 'special leave' imposed on the police minister and the RAF chief executive. Instead, it attempts to locate the concept of 'special leave' within the realm of labour law in South Africa. Special leave v Suspension Suspension refers to a temporary removal of an employee from their duties. Suspension in South Africa is typically divided into two categories: precautionary suspension and punitive suspension. A precautionary suspension is usually imposed when an employer is conducting an internal investigation that may lead to disciplinary proceedings. The aim is to safeguard the interests of the organisation by ensuring that the employee does not interfere with the investigation or operations. A punitive suspension, by contrast, is a disciplinary measure taken against an employee found guilty of misconduct. It is less severe than dismissal but entails suspension without pay or benefits — the suspended employee does not receive a salary or benefits while away from work. 'Special leave', on the other hand, is not expressly provided for or defined in South African labour legislation. But it can be said that it is a form of leave granted by an employer to an employee, usually at the behest of the employee, and it can either be based on a policy or an employment contract. Like precautionary suspension and unlike punitive suspension, special leave is generally paid and the employee receives full benefits. But, without a clear definition in legislation or case law, the concept of special leave can be misconstrued and, in some instances, used as means to (indirectly) suspend employees. This was the case in Sibanyoni v Speaker of the City of Mbombela and Others . Here, the applicant, the chief financial officer of the City of Mbombela, approached the labour court on an urgent basis seeking to have the council's resolution to place her on 'special leave' declared unlawful and set aside. This followed a report accusing her of alleged misconduct and recommending that it be investigated. The court found that the special leave as contemplated in the regulations can only be granted at the behest of an employee and there is no such concept as 'forced special leave'. In reaching its decision, the court referred to other precedents, including Heyneke v Umhlatuze Municipality , where the court in dealing with the placement of a municipal manager on 'special leave' found: 'Special leave that is imposed on employees is effectively a suspension in the hope of subverting the residual unfair labour practice provisions of the Labour Relations Act No 66 of 1995 (LRA) and all the time and other constraints that accompany suspensions.' Likewise, in South African Municipal Workers Union obo Matola v Mbombela Local Municipality , it was held that what the respondent labelled as 'special leave' resolution was nothing but the suspension of the applicant in that case. In the end, the court in Sibanyoni found that the special leave imposed by an employer is essentially a euphemism for a precautionary suspension, to create an impression that the provisions were complied with. Whether the special leave is imposed for a prolonged period or short period is irrelevant, because it remains a suspension regardless. As a result, the court declared the resolution adopted by the council to place the chief financial officer on special leave unlawful, set it aside and ordered her reinstatement. While special leave and suspension are theoretically distinct principles, the growing use of special leave to suspend employees blurs the lines between the two. Accordingly, when an employer considers placing an employee on 'special leave', it must do so in a manner consistent with the employment contract or the workplace policy regulating such leave. Failure to do so may result in a finding that the special leave was, in fact, a suspension, and that the employer used the term to mask procedural unfairness and evade legal obligations. If the employer intends to suspend the employee, it should follow the legal prescripts governing suspensions to avoid exposure to unfair labour practice claims. Andile Mphale is a dispute resolution attorney at Lebea Inc Attorneys.
The Herald
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald
'He acted decisively': Ndlozi supports Ramaphosa's decision amid criticism
Opposition parties including the EFF, ActionSA, DA, GOOD Party, ATM and Build One SA have rejected Ramaphosa's decision. The EFF said Ramaphosa should've fired Mchunu instead of placing him on special leave. 'This so-called 'special leave' is a cowardly deflection, designed to shield a corrupt minister whose involvement in organised crime has been laid bare by Mkhwanazi,' EFF spokesperson Sinawo Thambo said. Build One SA leader Mmusi Maimane said the move was not enough. 'We have had enough commissions of inquiry. I believe Mchunu should have been fired and the other ministers who have lied to parliament. This was a missed opportunity,' he said. The DA said it would not allow another commission of inquiry that would take years to yield results. 'These allegations provided the president with an opportunity to show bold and firm leadership,' DA leader John Steenhuisen said. 'Instead, he has again outsourced executive responsibility to a commission and South Africans have grown cynical of talk shops, task teams and commissions which they see as buying time and avoiding accountability. 'The country cannot afford another elaborate filing cabinet of findings that gathers dust while the politically connected escape justice.' Social media users have also expressed disapproval of Ramaphosa's decisions. Here are more reactions from X:
