By Stephen Sadie, CGISA CEO

South Africa is not short of a governance framework. It arguably has one of the world’s best corporate governance codes, the King Code. This globally respected benchmark for ethical leadership, accountability and transparency should, on paper, position South Africa as a governance success story.

But switch on the tap.

Across the country, water systems are failing. Pipes burst with predictable regularity. Reservoirs run dry. Tankers arrive – sometimes at great cost. What should be a basic public service has become a daily uncertainty for millions.

This is not a natural phenomenon nor a failure of policy. It is a failure of governance.

And at the centre of that failure is a deceptively simple question: who is responsible for governance?

In theory, governance means clear accountability – individuals tasked with oversight of the long-term planning, maintenance and delivery of essential services. In reality, responsibility is blurred across municipalities, water boards and departments. When infrastructure collapses, it is rarely clear who should answer for it.

Follow the money and the picture becomes clearer. Revenue intended for maintaining water systems is often absorbed into broader municipal budgets. Instead of being ring-fenced for infrastructure, it is redirected to salaries, bonuses and other line items. Meanwhile, ageing pipes – some decades old – are left to fail. The result is a cycle of crisis management: fix the break, shut the water, turn it back on, and wait for the next rupture.

We cannot blame it on bad luck because it is a predictable outcome of poor governance.

The deeper issue is capability. Bulk water systems are complex, technical operations. Yet many of the responsible entities lack sufficient engineering expertise at board level. In some cases, basic information about board members’ qualifications is not even publicly available, for example, Johannesburg Water. Such opacity is a governance red flag.

Which brings us to an uncomfortable but unavoidable truth: South Africa’s governance crisis is, at its core, a crisis of appointments.

At least three principles in the IoDSA King V™ Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa* deal with the “who” in governance.

  • Principle 1: The governing body leads ethically and effectively as the focal point of corporate governance in the organisation.
  • Principle 5: The governing body ensures that its composition is balanced with respect to the mix of competencies, diversity and independence that enables it to discharge its obligations objectively and effectively.
  • Principle 7: The governing body ensures that the appointment and delegation to management promote operational effectiveness and that the respective roles and decision-making powers of the governing body and management are clearly defined.

For too long, merit has been subordinated to political loyalty, factional alignment and patronage. The result is governing bodies filled by individuals who are not always equipped or empowered to do the jobs they hold. No governance framework, however well designed, can compensate for that.

And yet, where capable leadership is installed, the results are markedly different. The recovery of the South African Revenue Service under Edward Kieswetter shows what is possible when competence and integrity are prioritised. The same can be said of the decision by the late Pravin Gordhan to bring in Mteto Nyati as chair and Dan Marokane as CEO at Eskom, after it had been gutted by state capture. Loadshedding has come to a halt.

South Africa does not lack skills. It lacks the consistent application of those skills where they are most needed.

Compounding this is a crisis of consequence. The years of state capture exposed systemic corruption across the state. A billion was spent investigating it. Yet prosecutions have been slow and limited. The message this sends is corrosive: exposure does not necessarily lead to accountability.

At the same time, those who speak out face real risks. Whistleblowers are sidelined, threatened and, in some cases, killed. Despite legislative protections, the system does not adequately shield those who act in the public interest.

The consequences are visible everywhere. Failing water systems. Broken traffic lights. Deteriorating roads. Unreliable electricity. These are not isolated service delivery issues – they are the daily expression of governance failure at the point where the state meets its citizens.

So what needs to change?

First, South Africa must return to a basic principle: governance starts with people. Appointments must be based on competence, experience and integrity, not political interest. This is not a radical idea. It is standard practice in any functioning organisation.

Second, accountability must be enforced. Oversight mechanisms exist, but they are too often ignored or inconsistently applied. Real, tangible consequences must follow failure, whether administrative or criminal.

Third, the country must make better use of its strengths. South Africa has deep pools of talent and technical expertise. We have seen how well our national sports teams have done because only the best are chosen to represent the country. Our national teams have no place for laggards or passengers and neither would we tolerate them.

Finally, those who uphold governance must be protected. Whistleblowers and journalists are not irritants in the system; they are its safeguards. Without these heroes of our day, failure remains hidden until it becomes a crisis. Well trained company secretaries and governance professionals are essential for any governing body. That is why our Institute, The Chartered Governance Institute of Southern Africa, is committed to building leaders in corporate governance.

South Africa’s governance crisis is not a mystery. The causes are well understood. The solutions are not complex.

What is missing is not knowledge, nor frameworks, nor solutions. What is missing is the will to appoint the right people onto our governing bodies. Until that changes, the country will remain trapped in its current contradiction: a world-class governance framework, and a lived reality that falls well short of it.

*Copyright and trademarks are owned by the Institute of Directors in South Africa NPC and all its rights are reserved.