Even though I do not know the full extent of the allegations against Professors Sakhela Buhlungu and Nokuthula Sibiya, their cases may well fall squarely in this category of flimsy allegations. The Zondo and Madlanga commissions have helped to lay bare state capture in South Africa. With some of it dramatised on TV through many witnesses, only a few could claim not to know what it is.
On 23 March 2026, Universities South Africa (USAf) held a seminal webinar on institutional governance, focusing on what was termed institutional capture in the higher education sector. Evidently, state capture inspired this webinar.
The jury is still out on what institutional capture, if separate from state capture, really is. There is ample evidence, though, that these two concepts overlap and even coalesce, as some of the external and internal protagonists are of the same ilk.
From the presentations and discussions, it became apparent that both internal and external forces are at work. Because it takes two to tango, the familiar external players — consisting of politicians, so-called business forums, convocation factions and criminals — collude with some internal staff with the sole intention to capture and gorge.
For all we know, the higher education sector might even have some senior managers who aid and abet institutional capture, just as the Madlanga commission has outed some high-ranking police officers alleged to have facilitated police capture.
When state or institutional capture rears its ugly head, it brooks no opposition and nobody may stand in its way. If one resists, one will be shoved aside, no matter how flimsy or trumped-up the allegations may be.
In my 20 years as a vice-chancellor, at least three attempts have been made to remove me for daring to stand up against power, corruption and malfeasance. This occurred 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 since occurred two more times, at the Durban University of Technology, where I am in my 10th year as vice-chancellor and principal.
The most recent, and perhaps the most desperate attempt, was in September 2024. It would be laughable if it were not such a tragic illustration of ongoing attempts to capture higher education institutions.
For my first 10-year tenure as vice-chancellor, I was without a bodyguard. But I might not have survived the last eight years without bodyguards — thanks to the clear, present and continuing danger to my life amid the raging waves of institutional capture.
Part of the genesis of the last attempt against me is a meeting I had with some members of convocation in 2018, when they directly accused me of not giving them tenders — as if giving tenders were part of my job profile, authority or competence. It is not a coincidence that all those convocants had once been in the SRC and their comrades were in council until recently.
In South Africa, being in the SRC often connotes deep political roots aligned with political parties that practise what they call democratic centralism — clearly a warped and corrupt understanding of the original meaning of the concept.
As understood and practised by capturers of institutions, democratic centralism is inimical to academia. It means the big political bosses, deeply implicated in state capture, run the show and everyone must fall like dominoes. There is, thus, this deep and insidious link with politics behind all developments we see in institutional capture.
Recently, we have seen vice-chancellors being dressed down and almost frog-marched publicly in parliament. Site visits are replete with overt and covert messages in the corridors about tenders, the main instrument of state and institutional capture.
Given a safe platform that President Cyril Ramaphosa could perhaps provide, I could mention names — but not yet. Indeed, many of us could mention names in high places. Even some very new vice-chancellors are not spared these flimsy or trumped-up allegations, so they know at the beginning of their tenures that they must not upset the apple cart of capture.
They must respect this warped version of democratic centralism as politicians and their lackeys continue to be on the prowl for resources by whatever means.
Even though I do not know the full extent of the allegations against Buhlungu (University of Fort Hare) and Sibiya (Mangosuthu University of Technology), their cases may well fall squarely in this category of flimsy allegations.
Let me briefly analyse what Buhlungu is being accused of — namely, the appointment of executive directors that did not follow due process, as reported in newspaper articles.
Articles published so far reveal that it is he who, in the first place, went to the council to explain and correct this through condonation, which is a generally accepted practice in any organisation. Clearly, there have been gaps in the human resources division at Fort Hare. Coincidentally, one of the executive directors is meant to strengthen this division. None of the articles points to any malicious intent on the part of Buhlungu.
For all we know, Buhlungu may have been trying to deal with an emergency for which he hoped to obtain subsequent council condonation. But because there has been a scramble to find something against him, this opportunity has not been missed.
The reason we have the internal audit function in many organisations is that professionals know there will be instances that may not have followed established processes and controls and will require condonation or ratification.
As long as there is no malicious intent, lessons are taken, missteps corrected and work continues. If we were to suspend and discipline everyone who missed a process — without malicious intent — many would have to be suspended and disciplined in organisations.
Could Fort Hare’s council, or rather some members in it, be captured by politicians and high-ranking civil servants who practise this perverse form of democratic centralism?
Could this suspension be a backlash against Buhlungu’s stoic posture against corruption? Could it be a response to the fact that, through his agency, the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) has outed about 33 people, many of whom are high-ranking politicians and civil servants, for fraudulent degrees from Fort Hare?
Has Buhlungu’s recent no-holds-barred interview with Ann Bernstein from CDE rubbed Fort Hare’s council the wrong way? Could the chair of council, relatively junior in the higher education sector, be seeking to ascend to the vice-chancellorship and be unable to wait for Buhlungu to leave? God forbid.
It is instructive to note that the relevant parliamentary portfolio committee immediately stated support for the council’s action. Could it not have waited until the disciplinary processes had been completed?
The seemingly excellent coordination between the portfolio committee and the council may not be that innocent. In that statement, none of the work Buhlungu has been doing against corruption is mentioned, let alone appreciated. Why would those with fellow politicians in the dock appreciate what Buhlungu has done?
I write this article fully aware that it will be seen by politicians, their ilk, so-called business forums and convocation factions as an attack on them and as an attempt to derail their agendas. In 2011/12, I faced the consequences after writing a similar article. I will most likely be called to parliament for a dressing-down and ridicule. I am at the tail end of my tenure and have little to lose. I must speak, and I will speak.
Sooner or later, there will be no one to speak for vice-chancellors, university executives and universities.
This country must act to stem the tide of institutional capture in the higher education sector. If not, universities will be hollowed out. They will soon lose their leadership on the continent. South Africa will be left with universities that are not what they should be.
Just as we have had the Zondo and Madlanga commissions, perhaps President Ramaphosa will one day institute a commission of inquiry into institutional capture in the higher education sector.
I am glad the minister of finance has recently identified the NSFAS system as one form of capture — my words, 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.
For all we know, the higher education sector might even have some senior managers who aid and abet institutional capture, just like the Madlanga Commission has outed some high-ranking police officers alleged to have facilitated police capture
