Allegations of cadre deployment were bandied around yesterday when the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education questioned the Minister, Ms Siviwe Gwarube, and the Department of Basic Education (DBE) over claims of interference in the filling of key positions in the department.
The committee held a robust engagement with the Minister and the department on allegations of undue influence in the appointment of people to fill two senior positions. After deliberating, the committee decided to seek legal advice on how best to proceed.
Committee Chairperson Ms Joy Maimela said the committee remains unconvinced by the explanations provided by Minister Gwarube and the DBE, particularly regarding the decision to recommend the second-ranked candidate over the top-performing candidate. “We were told that the Minister has the authority to do so. However, how is it procedurally fair that the highest-scoring candidate – who also performed best in the assessment – is overlooked simply because such discretion exists? Where is the fairness in the process?” she asked.
The posts were advertised in November 2024, with interviews conducted on 5 May 2025. The DBE briefed the committee on the appointments for Deputy Director-General (DDG): Curriculum Policy, Support and Monitoring, and also for Chief Director: Communications, as well as on the development of the national catalogue for learner/teacher support material.
It is alleged that Minister Gwarube unduly influenced the DDG appointment process by recommending the second-best performing candidate to Cabinet, instead of the top candidate. It is further alleged that the recommended candidate is linked to cadre deployment.
The committee heard that the top-performing candidate ranked highest in both the interview and the competency assessment, however, after the assessment phase, the selection panel’s recommendation was not upheld.
In her response, Minister Gwarube maintained that she exercised her executive responsibility to ensure that all processes were properly followed, rather than interfering in the process. Her recommendation, she explained, was based on identifying the most suitable candidate for the position, taking into account interview performance and overall suitability. She denied any prior knowledge of, or relationship with, the recommended candidate, including any awareness of the individual’s political affiliations.
The Minister suggested that former minister had followed a similar approach in selecting a second-ranked candidate. However, the Chief Director: Human Resources contradicted this, stating that in her years of service under several ministers, she had not encountered such a practice before.
Regarding the Chief Director: Communications post, the committee heard allegations that a former Chief of Staff in the Minister’s office submitted two CVs directly to the Human Resources unit, despite the applicants not following the prescribed application process. In addition, Human Resources was instructed to provide both an A-list (all applicants) and a B-list (qualifying candidates). The former Chief of Staff has since resigned.
Ms Maimela said the committee took strong exception to the department’s failure to provide requested documentation ahead of the meeting. “We formally wrote to the Minister and the department requesting specific documents in preparation for today’s engagement. These were not provided, nor were reasons given for this failure. This is unacceptable and undermines the work of the committee,” she said.
Committee member Mr Sedukanelo Louw said the committee does not expect disclosure of information that is not part of the ongoing process. “We are looking for documents with regards to our parliamentary privilege. We are, however, covered by the law to do oversight on any matter. Failure for us not to receive documentation is deliberate, since it’s not for the first time. We wanted documentation as to how we can align our line of questioning.”
Another committee member, Mr Siphetho Mkhize, accused the DBE of “unresponsiveness, blame shifting and scapegoating and this committee can solve this by starting to act against it”. Another committee member, Mr Mandla Shiwkambana, asked who took the decision to withhold the documentation requested by the committee.
Committee member Ms Ciska Jordaan supported Minister Gwarube’s proposal that, in future, a letter would accompany the presentation, explaining what documents can be made available and the reasons for non-availability.
“We understand and respect that some matters may still be subject to Cabinet processes. However, pending processes do not absolve the department from accountability to Parliament. The committee will continue to interrogate the processes followed and the governance implications arising from these matters,” concluded Ms Maimela.
Rajaa Azzakani
25 March 2026
Arrange a tour