The Zondo and Madlanga Commissions helped lead to “state capture” in South Africa. Some of this has been dramatized on TV through multiple witnesses, with only a few claiming they don't know what it is.
On 23 March 2026, Universities South Africa (USAF) held a seminal webinar on institutional governance, titled “Institutional Capture” in the higher education sector. Obviously, state capture is what motivates this webinar.
The jury is still out on what exactly “institutional capture” is, if at all, different from “state capture.” However, there is ample evidence that these two concepts overlap and even mix together as some external and internal heroes are of the same type.
It became clear from the presentations and discussions that internal and external forces are at work. Because it takes two people to tango, familiar external players including politicians, so-called business platforms, conniving factions, some external members of the council, and criminals, collude with some internal staff with the sole intention of capturing and plundering. For all we know, there may be some executive managers in the higher education sector who aid and abet institutional capture, just as the Madlanga Commission has singled out some high-ranking police officers accused of aiding and abetting police capture.
When state or institutional capture rears its ugly head, it tolerates no opposition, and no one can stand in its way. If anyone protests, he or she will be sidelined, no matter how flimsy and/or fabricated the allegations are.
When state or institutional capture rears its ugly head, it tolerates no opposition, and no one can stand in its way.
In my 20 years as Vice Chancellor, there have been at least three attempts to remove me for daring to stand up to power, corruption and malfeasance. This happened in 2012, when I was at the Central University of Technology – where I served for 10 years as Vice Chancellor and Principal. Similar attempts to remove me have taken place twice more, at the Durban University of Technology, where I am in my 10th year as Vice-Chancellor and Principal.
The most recent, and perhaps most desperate, attempt took place in September 2024. This would be funny if it were not such a sad illustration of the ongoing efforts to take over institutions of higher education. In my first 10 years of tenure as Vice Chancellor, I was without a bodyguard. But, I could not survive without bodyguards for the past eight years – thanks to the clear, present, and constant threat to my life amid intense waves of institutional capture.
Part of the genesis of the last attempt against me is a meeting I had with some members of the Convocation in 2018, when they directly accused me of not awarding them tenders – as if awarding tenders was a thoughtless and inherently corrupt act done without using policies, procedures and structures. It is no coincidence that all those conveners were once in the SRC and their colleagues were in the Council until recently.
In South Africa, being in the SRC often reflects deep political roots associated with political parties that practice what they call “democratic centralism” – clearly a distorted and corrupt understanding of the original meaning of democratic centralism. As understood and practiced by those who occupy institutions, “democratic centralism” is harmful to academia. This means that big political masters, deeply entrenched in state capture, run the show and everyone else will have to fall like dominoes. Thus, this deep and insidious relationship with politics is behind most of the developments we see in “institutional capture.”
Recently, we have seen Vice Chancellors marching into Parliament in public dressed up, almost like frogs. Site visits are filled with both overt and covert messages in the corridors about tenders, which are the main instrument of state and institutional capture. Even some new Vice-Chancellors are not spared from these frivolous and/or fabricated allegations about this or that, so they know right at the beginning of their tenure that they should not upset the apple cart of occupation. They must respect this distorted version of “democratic centrism” as politicians and their supporters continue to seek resources by any means necessary. President Cyril Ramaphosa could perhaps provide a safe forum from which names could be mentioned.
Although I have no knowledge of the depth of the allegations against Professors Sakhela Buhlungu (University of Fort Hare) and Nokuthula Sibiya (Mangosuthu University of Technology), who recently faced suspension, their cases may fall into this category of light allegations.
I want to briefly analyze what Professor Sakhela Buhlungu is being accused of, namely that procedure was not followed in the appointments of Executive Directors, as we read in the newspaper articles.
The articles published so far show that in the first place, it is he who went to the council to explain and correct it through amnesty, which is a generally accepted practice in any organization. Clearly, there have been shortcomings in the human resources division at Fort Hare. Incidentally, one of the executive directors aims to strengthen exactly this division. Neither article points to any malicious intent on the part of Professor Buhlungu.
In fact, the same forensic report, which has found no malicious intent, is being used to torture and crucify him. For all we know, Professor Buhlungu was probably trying to deal with an emergency for which he hoped to get an apology from the Council later. But, because they are trying to find something against him, they cannot miss this perverse opportunity.
The reason we have an internal audit function in many organizations is so that all professionals know that something will happen or someone who did not follow established procedures and controls will need an apology or vindication later. As long as there is no malicious intent, we learn the lesson, correct the mistakes and move on. If, from now on, we have to suspend and discipline all those who missed this or that process, but without malicious intent, then so many people in so many organizations would have to be suspended and disciplined.
Could the Council of Fort Hare or some of its members be captured by politicians and high-ranking civil servants who practice a distorted sense of “democratic centralism”? Could this suspension be a reaction against Professor Buhlungu's tough stance against corruption? Could this be a response to the fact that the SIU, through its agency, has thrown out about 33 people from Fort Hare for fake degrees, many of whom are high-ranking politicians and civil servants? Has Professor Buhlangu's recent no-holds-barred interview with Ann Bernstein from the CDE rubbed the council chair of Fort Hare the wrong way?
By the way, the President of the Council of Fort Hare is said to be a Director in the CPUT, a position a few levels below the Vice-Chancellor. Thus, he is relatively junior in the higher education sector. Could he be seeking to establish himself in the Vice-Chancellor position and cannot wait for Professor Buhlungu to leave before he has nine months left on his contract? God forbid!
This country must do something to stop this rapid wave of institutional capture in the higher education sector. If not, our universities will become hollow of their essence. They will soon lose their firm leadership in the continent
It is worth noting that the relevant parliamentary portfolio committee immediately issued a statement in support of the Council's action. Couldn't they have waited until the disciplinary procedures were completed? The seemingly excellent coordination between the Portfolio Committee and the Council may not be so flawless. That statement does not mention, let alone commend, any of the work Professor Buhlungu is doing against corruption. Why would people whose fellow politicians are essentially in the dock appreciate what Professor Buhlungu has done?
I am writing this article knowing full well that it will be seen as an attack on him by politicians, their ilk, so-called business forums and conclave factions and an attempt to derail their sinister agenda. If it is an attack, I don't know what should be called what has already emerged from the Zondo and Madlanga commissions.
I faced anger when I wrote such a serious article in 2011/12. I will probably be summoned to Parliament to be humiliated and ridiculed. I am at the last stage of my tenure. I have very little to lose, friends. I must speak and I will speak. It would be unwise to leave such a mess behind. Soon, there will be no one to speak for us as vice-chancellors, university officials and universities, as we will all sink into this black hole.
This country must do something to stop this rapid wave of institutional capture in the higher education sector. If not, our universities will become hollow of their essence. They would soon lose their firm leadership in the continent. South Africa will continue to have universities that are not as they should be.
Just as we have the Zondo and Madlanga commissions, perhaps President Ramaphosa will, one day, set up a commission to investigate institutional capture in the higher education sector. Not that we have seen appreciable results yet. But, at least, it is all available to the South African public to know how deep we are.
I am pleased that the Finance Minister has recently called out the NSFAS system, for example, as a form of structural and legislative capture; My words and not his. Does the President need more evidence?
- Professor Thandwa Mthembu is the Vice-Chancellor and Principal at Durban University of Technology. He writes in his personal capacity and as a proud alumnus of the University of Fort Hare.