The rise of Busisiwe Mkhwebane to the esteemed position of Public Protector has raised troubling concerns about the resilience of South Africa’s democratic institutions, warns political analyst Mondli Makhanya. In a provocative column, Makhanya argues that Mkhwebane’s controversial tenure highlights the vulnerability of key state institutions to political manipulation and incompetence, stressing that urgent reforms are needed to safeguard the country’s democracy from individuals like her.
Mkhwebane, who served as Public Protector from 2016 until her removal in 2023, faced numerous legal challenges, including allegations of misconduct and being politically compromised. Her tenure, marred by court losses and controversial reports, culminated in her impeachment following a parliamentary inquiry into her fitness for office. Despite the gravity of these events, Makhanya points to Mkhwebane’s appointment to one of South Africa’s most critical oversight roles as symptomatic of deeper systemic issues.
Writing in his latest column, Makhanya states: “The fact that someone like Busisiwe Mkhwebane, who clearly lacked both the impartiality and legal acumen to effectively fulfill the role, could ascend to such a high office underscores the fragility of our democratic institutions. It is not merely a matter of individual failure but also a reflection of structural weaknesses in how we select and protect our constitutional office bearers.”
Makhanya’s warning comes as the country grapples with the fallout from Mkhwebane’s contentious leadership. Under her stewardship, the Office of the Public Protector became a battleground for political infighting, with critics accusing her of using the office to settle personal and political scores. High-profile investigations, such as her probes into President Cyril Ramaphosa’s CR17 campaign and former finance minister Pravin Gordhan, frequently ended in legal defeats, undermining the credibility of the office.
“The role of the Public Protector is to serve as a guardian of the Constitution and a watchdog for the people. Yet under Mkhwebane, the office was used to exact revenge and pursue political vendettas, often at the expense of truth and justice,” Makhanya wrote.
Makhanya contends that Mkhwebane’s appointment reflects a broader political failure. He highlights how political parties often place individuals in key positions based on their loyalties rather than their qualifications and commitment to upholding constitutional values. “When state institutions become tools for political patronage, the real losers are the citizens. The Public Protector should have been a shield for the people, but instead, under Mkhwebane, it became a weapon for certain political interests.”
As South Africa looks ahead to future appointments to constitutional bodies, Makhanya emphasizes the need for greater vigilance from both the public and lawmakers. He calls for a more transparent and rigorous selection process to prevent individuals with hidden agendas from taking control of key institutions.
“The lesson we must take from the Mkhwebane experience is that democracy requires constant vigilance. We cannot allow individuals with ulterior motives or inadequate competence to occupy critical offices meant to protect our sacred order. We must always be on guard against the rise of figures who could undermine our democratic foundations for personal gain,” Makhanya concludes.
Makhanya’s cautionary words serve as a reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions and the need to ensure that South Africa’s constitutional bodies remain independent, effective, and protected from political interference. The challenge, he argues, is for both citizens and politicians to remain ever-watchful and proactive in safeguarding the country’s democracy from figures like Mkhwebane.
