The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) says today’s Pretoria High Court ruling on the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) raises serious questions about Higher Education and Training Minister Buti Manamela’s judgement and his handling of one of South Africa’s most important public institutions.
The court suspended Prof Hlengani Mathebula’s appointment as NSFAS administrator and restored the seven remaining board members to manage and govern the institution pending the final determination of Part B of their review application.
While the final review is still to be determined, the findings made by the Judge in granting interim relief are significant.
Most notably, the court found that the remaining NSFAS board was quorate, despite Minister Manamela having stated that it was not.
This supports concerns OUTA raised as far back as April.
When interim Chairperson Dr Mugwena Maluleke and board member Karabo Mohale resigned in April, OUTA questioned why their departure had suddenly created a crisis over the board’s ability to function lawfully.
OUTA subsequently established that several other board members had resigned during 2025 and had not been replaced. The judgment now records that on 15 January 2026, the acting Chairperson asked the Minister to fill vacancies on the board, warning that its composition no longer met certain requirements of the NSFAS Act.
On 23 January, the Minister declined to fill those vacancies, citing his pending self-review of the board’s appointment.
The NSFAS board crisis did not therefore appear overnight. The Minister knew that the board was losing members and specialist expertise. He was asked to address the vacancies and chose not to.
Instead, vacancies remained unfilled until the situation deteriorated further, and the Minister eventually dissolved the board and placed NSFAS under administration.
“The court judgment confirms much of what OUTA has been saying for months. This crisis was allowed to develop when it could and should have been addressed much earlier,” says Wayne Duvenage, OUTA CEO.
“The Minister knew the board was losing members. He was asked to fill those vacancies and chose not to. Then, when the situation reached crisis point, his solution was to dissolve the board and appoint an administrator whose suitability for the position should have raised serious red flags. That is not proactive governance.”
The court’s findings regarding Mathebula’s appointment are particularly concerning.
OUTA questioned the appointment in May, pointing specifically to Mathebula’s history at the South African Revenue Service (SARS) and the adverse findings made by the Nugent Commission.
The High Court has now made serious findings about those concerns.
The judge found that the Nugent Commission findings were relevant to Mathebula’s appointment and raised concerns regarding his integrity and conduct in a position of authority.
The judgment found that the Minister either did not have the full picture before him or failed to properly consider those findings, and that his acceptance of Mathebula’s explanation in the face of the adverse findings was irrational.
For OUTA, these findings raise serious questions about the due diligence conducted before Mathebula was entrusted with the administration of an institution responsible for approximately R54 billion a year and the funding of around 800 000 students.
The judgment also records that Mathebula told the court that he had not faced disciplinary proceedings at SARS. The judge found this to be untrue, stating that Mathebula had been facing disciplinary proceedings but resigned before they could be concluded.
These findings go directly to the judgement exercised by Minister Manamela when choosing the person who would take control of NSFAS.
“This was not an appointment where the Minister could afford to get it wrong,” says Duvenage.
“NSFAS had already been through years of instability. The last thing it needed was another questionable leadership decision. When you put someone in charge of R54 billion in public money and the futures of hundreds of thousands of students, there can be no room for questionable appointments or compromised judgement.”
There is also an uncomfortable irony in where NSFAS now finds itself.
The Minister dissolved the board and appointed an administrator ostensibly to stabilise the institution. Three months later, the court has suspended that administrator and restored the board.
The judgment also records that NSFAS failed to meet the 31 May 2026 deadline for submitting its annual financial statements while under Mathebula’s administration, although an extension was subsequently obtained.
Instead of restoring stability, the decision to place NSFAS under administration has resulted in another change of leadership, another court battle and further uncertainty around an institution upon which hundreds of thousands of students depend.
OUTA has repeatedly warned that the problems at NSFAS form part of a wider pattern of governance failures within the higher education portfolio, including delayed and contested appointments across SETAs and ongoing concerns around the National Skills Fund.
Known governance problems are allowed to develop. Decisions come late. Questionable appointments follow. Litigation becomes necessary. Public institutions then carry the cost.
Students and taxpayers ultimately carry the risk.
OUTA notes that Part B of the application is still to be determined and will follow that process closely. The court has directed that the review be expedited, preferably before the end of November 2026.
For now, Minister Manamela should respect the court order and ensure an orderly return of governance authority to the NSFAS board. He should also urgently fill the vacant board positions with suitably qualified and independent people, restore the specialist financial expertise lost through previous resignations and ensure there is no disruption to student funding.
The reinstated board must also urgently clarify the position regarding the appointment of a permanent NSFAS CEO. Before the board was dissolved, it resolved on 29 April to appoint Waseem Carrim as CEO. With the board now restored, it must explain whether that resolution remains valid and what steps will follow. NSFAS cannot continue operating indefinitely without permanent executive leadership, and students, staff and stakeholders deserve certainty on who will lead the institution.
The NSFAS matter cannot be viewed in isolation.
OUTA is already before the Pretoria High Court challenging another decision by Minister Manamela, his reappointment of Gugu Mkhize as INSETA CEO for a further five years. OUTA contends that the appointment process was irregular and unlawful, and that Mkhize’s performance record did not justify reappointment. The EFF has separately launched its own legal challenge to the reappointment.
For OUTA, this points to a concerning pattern of poor judgement in critical leadership appointments across the higher education portfolio.
“We are already in court challenging Minister Manamela’s decision to reappoint the INSETA CEO, and now the High Court has suspended his choice of administrator at NSFAS,” says Wayne Duvenage, OUTA CEO. “These decisions cannot simply be viewed in isolation. They raise serious questions about the Minister’s judgement and his ability to provide the leadership this portfolio desperately needs.”
The judgment should also give President Cyril Ramaphosa further reason to consider Minister Manamela’s continued suitability to lead the higher education portfolio.
OUTA has previously called on the President to consider removing Manamela from office. The concerns that prompted that call have not gone away. This judgment adds further weight to them.
“Government cannot keep allowing institutions to deteriorate and then treat administration as the solution,” says Duvenage.
“Administration should be an exceptional intervention, not a substitute for doing the basic work of governance. Fill the vacancies. Appoint competent people. Support them to do their jobs. And hold them accountable when they don’t. That is how you build stable public institutions.”
NSFAS needs stability and competent leadership. Students need certainty. And when poor governance decisions create further instability instead of fixing it, there must be accountability.
Leave a Reply