Why Desmond Golding Should Not Chair the NHFC — And Why JJ Tabane Should Know Better

Nkazimulo Moyeni

South Africa is living through a fragile moment in its democratic recovery. The aftershocks of state capture are still reverberating across public institutions, from electricity and transport to municipalities and housing. Billions were looted. Oversight was gutted. Boards became political instruments rather than guardians of public money. The Zondo Commission documented in painful detail how compromised appointments laid the foundation for the collapse of governance.

It is in this context that the appointment of Desmond Golding as chair of the National Housing Finance Corporation (NHFC) has triggered growing concern. And it is in this same context that JJ Tabane’s defence of Golding feels not only surprising but deeply disappointing because Tabane, of all people, should understand why this matters.

A History of Principles Abandoned

There was a time when Tabane was one of the clearest voices demanding ethical leadership within the state. During his COPE years, he argued forcefully that the New South Africa required public servants who were beyond reproach, not merely technically competent. He insisted that unresolved allegations even without a conviction were enough to disqualify anyone from leading a public entity.

He was right then. 

Why, in 2025, when corruption has nearly destroyed the country, are we suddenly being told that unresolved clouds no longer matter? Why must South Africans now accept governance standards lower than the ones Tabane himself once championed?

The defence of Desmond Golding’s appointment is not simply a shift in opinion. It is a shift in principle that contradicts the core values Tabane built his public credibility on.

Public Positions Require Public Confidence

Let us strip away the rhetoric and return to governance fundamentals. Golding is linked factually, publicly and widely to the long running matter involving the failed 2012 North Sea Jazz Festival in KwaZulu Natal. Although he and others were discharged by the High Court, the state has returned to seek an appeal in the Supreme Court of Appeal. The case is not settled. It is active and unresolved.

Golding maintains his innocence, and that must be respected. But that alone is not enough to justify placing him at the helm of the NHFC, an entity responsible for billions in public finance.

Public boards do not operate on the standard of criminal courts. They operate on the standard of public confidence, institutional integrity and risk management.

To lead a strategic entity like the NHFC, a chairperson must be above any cloud of doubt. Not just legally innocent. Unquestionably credible.

The NHFC Cannot Afford Compromised Leadership

The NHFC is mandated with providing affordable housing finance to low and middle income South Africans. It manages complex financial instruments, multi year commitments, public private partnerships and infrastructure programmes that affect millions of families. This entity cannot afford even the perception of compromised leadership.

The Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and governance principles are explicit: directors must be fit and proper, which includes integrity, reputation and freedom from unresolved ethical concerns. A board chair must set the tone for governance, discipline and transparency. Even a small question mark over that office can destabilise the whole corporation. Is this risk really worth taking? Especially now, when the country is desperate to rebuild trust in public institutions?

Selective Rigour Has No Place in Public Ethics

What is most troubling about Tabane’s position is that it represents a form of selective rigour: one set of governance rules when critiquing others, and another when defending someone politically or personally palatable. South Africa cannot survive another round of convenience based ethics.

We cannot insist on “clean governance” in one institution, and then lower the standard in another simply because we like or respect the candidate. That logic is exactly what enabled state capture. It is exactly what crippled Eskom, Transnet, PRASA, the SABC and so many municipalities.

If we would not accept a compromised candidate at PetroSA or SANRAL, then we cannot accept one in the NHFC. Consistency is the backbone of ethical governance.

This Is Not About Attacking Golding — It Is About Protecting the NHFC

Golding is entitled to fairness, dignity and due process. He is also entitled to defend his name fully. But the public is also entitled to protection, and the NHFC is entitled to leadership that does not carry unresolved ethical baggage.

The question is not whether Golding is guilty. The question is whether his unresolved legal and reputational challenges make him unsuitable to lead a body entrusted with billions of rands in public money.

The High Court, in discharging the accused in the North Sea Jazz Festival case, noted: “There is not a shred of evidence against them; a sniff of suspicion is not enough in a criminal trial.” Yet even this ruling cannot erase the perception risk for a public entity that is meant to operate with impeccable governance.

The answer, in any honest governance analysis, is yes — Desmond Golding is an unsuitable candidate to chair the NHFC.

The Country Needs Its Ethical Voices Back

South Africans are exhausted. They have endured load shedding, collapsing municipalities, water failures, crime, unemployment and institutional decay, all consequences of compromised leadership. The country desperately needs strong, clear, principled public voices who can speak truth without fear.

JJ Tabane used to be one of those voices.

His defence of Golding’s appointment is not just a disagreement. It is a departure from a governance philosophy he himself helped promote during some of South Africa’s darkest years. It is inconsistent, confusing and damaging, because it signals that standards can be bent when convenient.

The recovery from state capture requires the opposite: rigid, unwavering, unforgiving standards for public leaders.

We Must Choose Accountability Over Convenience

At this stage of South Africa’s democratic survival, the choice is stark. Either we insist on impeccable leadership for every public entity, no exceptions, no special cases — or we open the door once again to the gradual erosion of accountability.

Appointing someone with an unresolved cloud over their head is not just imprudent. It is reckless.

It weakens institutions. It undermines public trust. It signals that lessons have not been learned. It invites the return of the very governance failures we claim to be fighting.

The call for Golding to step aside is not personal. It is protective. It is rooted in the understanding that leadership in public finance is not just about qualification or competence. It is about trustworthiness, perception and public legitimacy.

Dr Tabane knows this. He built his reputation on it. South Africa needs him to reclaim that clarity.

The country cannot rebuild on compromised foundations. And the NHFC cannot be led by someone whose very presence invites doubt. If we are serious about ethical renewal, then the standards must remain high, especially where billions of public rands and the rights of vulnerable citizens are at stake.

This is not the time to abandon principle. It is the time to return to it.

*Nkazimulo Moyeni is an Attorney and editor of South African Daily