PRETORIA, Gauteng — NSFAS Administrator Prof Hlengani Mathebula has strongly dismissed recent media allegations accusing him of “living large,” using a public address to defend his appointment of four specialized advisors and outline a sweeping governance rescue plan for the troubled student financial aid scheme.
Speaking to address a wave of weekend press reports, the administrator firmly rejected the claims as slander, pivoting instead to highlight the severe institutional and financial crises he inherited upon taking office nearly two months ago.
A “Traumatized” Institution in Financial Disarray
Appointed via a government gazette on May 4, Prof Mathebula was brought in to resolve what the Minister of Higher Education described as prolonged governance challenges, legal concerns, and operational weaknesses. Now nearing the 90-day mark of his tenure—when he is expected to submit his comprehensive report to the minister on August 4—Prof Mathebula offered a stark assessment of the organization’s current state.
He described the student aid scheme as a “traumatized” and “fatigued” entity that is essentially “at war with itself.” Highlighting a severe lack of institutional stability, he noted that his appointment marks the third administration in just ten years, preventing the continuity needed to support vulnerable students.
The financial realities are equally grim. Prof Mathebula revealed that the Auditor-General issued a disclaimer audit opinion for two successive financial reporting cycles. Furthermore, he pointed to the existence of nine material irregularities within the organization. He emphasized that a disclaimer audit is a serious indictment, and the sheer volume of material irregularities necessitates immediate, specialized intervention to restore financial reliability.
Clarifying the Advisor Appointments and Remuneration
The controversy prompting the interview centered on allegations that the administrator was excessively spending on a large entourage of advisors. Prof Mathebula clarified the timeline and strict limitations of his hiring process.
He explained that he arrived at the entity entirely alone on the first Monday of May, spending the entire month conducting a fact-based assessment to avoid acting on preconceived notions. In June, he appointed two advisors to focus on specific operational areas. By July, he brought on two additional advisors specifically for their financial expertise to help resolve the material irregularities.
He noted that the government gazette that appointed him explicitly capped his advisory team at four members, a prudent limitation designed to prevent the bloated structures seen in previous administrations.
Addressing the issue of compensation, Prof Mathebula clarified that his personal remuneration requires peer-to-peer concurrence between the Minister of Higher Education and the Minister of Finance, as stipulated in Section 17(c) of the NSFAS Act. Because this approval process is still pending, he has not received any personal remuneration during his first two months on the job—a delay he accepts as normal administrative procedure.
Conversely, his four advisors operate as independent contractors. Their appointments were made with the full concurrence of the Minister of Higher Education, and they have been compensated for their work over the past month.
Defending His Public Trust Record Amid Legal Challenges
Beyond the financial and operational hurdles, Prof Mathebula is also facing ongoing litigation seeking to review and set aside his appointment. The legal challenge argues that his role is irrational and unlawful based on recommendations from the Nugent Commission regarding his previous tenure at the South African Revenue Service (SARS).
Defending his suitability for a position of public trust, Prof Mathebula emphasized that the Nugent Commission made no findings of criminality against him. He pointed out that the Commission did not recommend he be barred from holding public office, nor did it refer him to any law enforcement agencies.
While the Commission did heavily criticize his approval for the interception of emails—which included communications from both internal SARS staff and external figures, such as the head of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU)—Prof Mathebula argued this criticism was misplaced. He maintained that he was acting strictly in accordance with an existing organizational policy at SARS. He further noted that the responsibility to review and ensure the overarching legality of that policy did not rest solely on his shoulders.
As he prepares to submit his formal 90-day report to the minister, Prof Mathebula remains focused on stabilizing the institution, resolving the nine material irregularities, and ensuring the financial aid scheme can reliably serve the students who depend on it.