Close this search box.

National Arts Council Responses to the Weekly Mirror

You are here:
National Arts Council Responses to the Weekly Mirror



12 October 2022

  1. Grateful if you could confirm the existence of the e-mail communication thread thread below which Weekly SA Mirror has seen.


In an e-mail sent on November 2, 2021 at 12:55 pm, Her Royal Highness Dlamini writing to Mbina-Mthembu says;

” Please see attached revised NAC/NPO MOU. I have worked on it and used the same premise as the MOU between DSAC/NAC agreement in that lets make the MOU timeless, and any specifics will be dealt with in annexures”.

The e-mail message continues:

“Please also note my introduction of clauses 3.4 – 3,7 (new clauses) that I believe should be considered in terms of strengthening our controls)”.

Another e-mail sent by Dlamini to Mbina-Mthembu a few days later on November 9 at 3:35pm states:

“Dear Interim CEO. Please see attached final version as per our clean-up discussion”.

It is not clear what Dlamini means by ‘our clean-up discussion” but the final MOA was signed the following day on November 10, 2021.

The NAC is not in a position to deny or confirm emails that are considered company confidential information.

Council Members and Management (both current and former)  are always privy to confidential information to enable them to perform their role as custodians of the organisation. They should use this confidential information only in fulfilling this obligation towards the organisation. 

They should not abuse company confidential information, and should not use it for their own personal interest or any other illegitimate purpose. The duty of trustworthiness requires that Council Members /Staff (both current and former) refrain from taking advantage of confidential information of an organisation for her or his self-interest. 

This duty of confidentiality also applies even after a Council Member/ Staff’s term with an organisation has ended/been terminated.

However any reasonable reader of your alleged email would conclude that a “attached final version as per our clean-up discussion” in corporate terms would imply a final version of a document after all errors have been corrected, or amendments have been incorporated and/or reviews have been conducted. 

NAC officials at both Council and Management are committed to ensuring excellence within the organisation, and if these alleged emails from your sources have been confirmed (by your source) as being legitimate, such an email would be exemplary evidence of a functional organisation where its Leadership, driven by excellence (At both Management and Council) take their roles and responsibilities seriously and ensure that governance controls are embedded in every area of the organisation as they deliver on their mandate.


  1. The NAC records show that under the new board has paid R255 658,13 in its court battles with a small NGO South African Roadies Association, SARA, over social media tweets by its president Freddie Nyathela. We do not even know how much was spent on this case during the previous board and former CEO Rosemary Mangope tenure, suffice to say the amounts should be running into thousands of rands, monies meant to be spent on struggling artists and the creative sector at large.


  • Is this not a waste of taxpayers money?
  • How do you justify spending so much of taxpayers’ money trying to “muzzle” a unique black NGO in the whole contiinent. Lest we forget, SARA had applied for a funding of R920 734.62 for purchase of lighting and stage equipment in July 39, 2014, Would you mind sharing with us how much have been spent so far on this case.


On 29 August 2022, the High Court (Gauteng Local Division) dismissed an application for leave to appeal launched by SARA and Mr Nyathela.  SARA and Nyathela sought leave to appeal a judgment handed down on 29 April 2022 dismissing their rescission application against an order obtained by the NAC on 20 September 2018 which directed SARA and Nyathela to remove certain defamatory statements published on various forums and interdicted them from publishing further defamatory statements concerning the NAC. 

Costs in both applications were ordered against SARA and Mr. Nyathela and the NAC are currently in the process of preparing their bill of costs for taxation, to recoup taxpayers money.

Given the continued publication of various unsubstantiated allegations by SARA and Nyathela against the NAC and its representatives, the NAC launched a contempt application in June 2022 in terms of which an order is sought declaring that SARA and Nyathela be in contempt of the order of 20 September 2018 and that Nyathela be committed to prison for a period of 30 days, which committal be suspended on condition that Nyathela complies with the 20 September 2018 order. 

The NAC will continue to challenge the publication of unsubstantiated, sensationalist and misleading material against it and its representatives. SARA/Mr. Nyathela have for several years, embarked on an unwarranted campaign of harassment and abuse against the NAC and its representatives. As is presently the case with the pending contempt application, the NAC will enforce the interdictory relief contained in the 20 September 2018 order (which SARA and Nyathela have failed to set aside) should further defamatory statements be published in future.  

The NAC also wishes to confirm that funds related to Mr. Nyathelas/SARA legal cases at the NAC were sourced from internal operational costs and not artists money as alleged in your question..


(c)  The NAC records will show certain amounts being paid to Forest Deep & Buthelezi. In our attempt to find out about this entity our Google search revealed no results of Forest Deep & Buthelezi. Who is Forest Deep & Buthelezi and can we be afforded their contact details.

As an entity that complies to the POPI Act, which sets out the minimum standards regarding accessing and ‘processing’ of any personal information belonging to another. It is our duty as an organisation to protect our beneficiary information entrusted to us.

Please note the consequences of non-compliance with the POPI Act may lead to the Regulator imposing an administrative fine or even imprisonment.

We are confident that as a seasoned journalist, you are aware of our limitations in this regard, (due to POPIA) that the NAC will not be in a position to afford you with any beneficiary contact details. 


Further perusal of the NAC finances will show a law firm being paid R15 000 for an NAC/Mangope joint statement. Any justification for this kind of spending?

Please provide evidence in the form of a proof of payment of R15,000 for the cost item you refer to above. 


(e) We were made to understand there is a case against Celenhle (CAs 667.9/2022) opened at the JHB police station by one Mashiane. Any comment?

The NAC is not in a position to comment on any matter related to Mr. Tshepo Mashiane acting against any Official/s at the NAC at this time.  Except to note that the frivolous and malicious statements and/or actions Mr. Mashiane has made and continues to make will be dealt with at an appropriate platform. 





Related Posts