Controversial Social Development Minister Sisisi Tolashe Faces Scrutiny Over Salary Arrangement and Contract Irregularities
South Africa’s Minister of Social Development, Sisisi Tolashe, appeared before Parliament’s Social Development Oversight Committee in early 2025 to address a series of allegations that have dogged her tenure since her appointment in 2024. The hearing covered accusations ranging from the alleged misuse of a domestic worker’s salary to irregularities in the appointment of a former director‑general.
Background and Allegations
According to a Daily Maverick investigation published in late March 2025, Tolashe’s daughter, Khanyi, was reportedly receiving half of the monthly salary of a domestic worker employed at the minister’s state‑assigned residence in Cape Town. The worker, Nomathamsaqa Kuhlanga, earned R15,000 per month, and the arrangement allegedly violated public service regulations that prohibit officials from benefiting directly from the remuneration of staff assigned to their households.
The same report noted that Kuhlanga had originally been hired to care for Tolashe and her family at the Cape Town residence but later moved with them to a private home in East London—a relocation that also contravened civil service rules governing the use of state‑provided housing.
Parliamentary Testimony
During the committee session, Tolashe sought to distance herself from the salary arrangement. She stated that Kuhlanga had requested a transfer to the Eastern Cape to pursue training as a traditional healer (known locally as Uhuthwasa). Once in the Eastern Cape, Kuhlanga stayed with Tolashe’s daughter, Khanyi.
“As for the payments to the daughter, Chairperson, I have no knowledge of that as the salary was transferred directly from the department to her bank account.”
— Minister Sisisi Tolashe, Social Development Oversight Committee, March 2025
She added that a private agreement existed between Kuhlanga and her daughter, of which she claimed to be unaware until the matter surfaced in the press. Tolashe also addressed a separate controversy involving the former director‑general, Peter Netshipale, saying that her electronic signature had been fraudulently affixed to a five‑year contract despite a Cabinet directive limiting such appointments to one year.
Responses from Opposition and ANC Members
Opposition MPs were quick to criticise the minister’s defence. DA MP Nazley Sharif accused Tolashe of “throwing her own daughter under the bus” to protect her political career, arguing that accountability requires acknowledging responsibility rather than deflecting blame.
- Sharif: “Accountability is about saying, ‘Yes, that happened’. Accountability is not about saying, ‘It’s not my fault’.”
- ActionSA’s Dereleen James echoed the concern, noting that the minister’s statements appeared inconsistent with documentary evidence presented to the committee.
Some ANC members, however, dismissed the allegations as rumours amplified on social media. Bridget Masango, DA MP and chair of the Social Development Committee, rejected that dismissal and called for an independent investigation.
“She immediately called on the Public Service Commission headed by Prof. Somadoda Fikeni to investigate the matter.”
Public Service Commission Findings
The Public Service Commission (PSC) undertook a review of both the salary arrangement and the director‑general’s contract. Regarding the former director‑general, the PSC’s forensic examination confirmed that Tolashe’s electronic signature had been attached to the five‑year contract without her authorisation. The investigation also uncovered that the appointed private secretary—who also served as Tolashe’s chief of staff—lacked the requisite qualifications and had submitted three contradictory CVs during the hiring process.
Based on these findings, the PSC recommended disciplinary action against all officers involved and urged the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) to pursue a deeper probe into potential fraud and maladministration.
Implications and Next Steps
The unfolding controversy places Minister Tolashe under intense political and public scrutiny. If the PSC’s recommendations are enacted, they could result in sanctions ranging from formal reprimands to suspension or dismissal of implicated officials. Moreover, the SIU’s involvement may lead to criminal investigations should evidence of fraudulent conduct be substantiated.
For observers of South African governance, the case highlights ongoing challenges in enforcing public service regulations, particularly concerning the use of state resources for personal benefit and the integrity of electronic approval systems. Continued oversight by parliamentary committees, the PSC, and the SIU will be essential to determine accountability and restore confidence in the Social Development department.
