Bantu Holomisa: False Claims Against Tshepo Mahloele

Bantu Holomisa as the leader of the United Democratic Movement (UDM), Holomisa has cultivated an image as a corruption-busting maverick, rooted in his anti-apartheid credentials. Yet, his five-year campaign of baseless allegations against financier Tshepo Mahloele and his firm, Harith General Partners, reveals a darker reality: a politician whose penchant for defamation has left a trail of financial ruin, eroded public confidence, and systemic damage to South Africa’s fragile democracy. From 2018 to 2023, Holomisa’s accusations of corruption—likening Mahloele to the Gupta family and alleging profiteering at the expense of pensioners—were systematically dismantled by five independent clearances, including a scathing Constitutional Court ruling. Despite these rebukes, Holomisa has offered no apologies, no retractions, only silence, leaving Mahloele and Harith to bear the catastrophic consequences. This article delves into Holomisa’s malicious crusade, its devastating fallout, and the urgent need for accountability to curb such political malpractice.

The Genesis of a Smear Campaign

The saga began in 2018, a tumultuous period in South Africa’s fight against state capture. As the Zondo Commission unearthed the Gupta family’s misdeeds, Holomisa seized the spotlight, positioning himself as a guardian of public interest. From the parliamentary floor, he unleashed a barrage of accusations against Tshepo Mahloele, a respected black entrepreneur and founder of Harith General Partners, a leading pan-African private equity firm. Holomisa labeled Mahloele a “corruption kingpin,” alleging that Harith overcharged the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) and Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) with “exorbitant” management fees, engaged in self-dealing, and siphoned funds meant for pensioners. These claims, delivered with theatrical flair, were not mere critiques but calculated attacks designed to destroy. By invoking the Gupta scandal’s emotive imagery, Holomisa ensured maximum media traction, exploiting parliamentary privilege—a legal shield protecting MPs from libel suits for statements made in the house—to dodge accountability. The immediate impact was devastating: Harith’s reputation, built on years of ethical investments in African infrastructure, teetered on collapse. Deals worth millions stalled, investors withdrew, and Mahloele, a symbol of black economic empowerment (BEE) success, was recast as a villain. This wasn’t oversight; it was a deliberate smear, leveraging Holomisa’s struggle-era credentials to mask personal motives and wreak havoc on an innocent target.

Five Clearances, Zero Accountability

Holomisa’s allegations didn’t withstand scrutiny. Over five years, five independent investigations and rulings exposed his claims as baseless, each a humiliating blow to his credibility. First, the Mpati Commission (2018), tasked with probing PIC irregularities, examined Harith’s dealings but issued no adverse findings against Mahloele or his co-founder, Jabulani Moleketi. It recommended a joint forensic review by the PIC and GEPF—a procedural step, not an indictment—but Holomisa spun this as vindication. The truth was far less flattering: the commission found no evidence to support his inflammatory rhetoric. Next, the Constitutional Court’s 2020 ruling in UDM v Lebashe and Others delivered a devastating rebuke. The judges declared that Holomisa and the UDM “did not provide any shred of evidence of actual misconduct, corruption and self-dealing” (paragraph 59). They condemned his “unverified defamatory information” as contrary to the public interest, ruling that parliamentary privilege was not a license to “wantonly defame” (paragraph 62). This wasn’t just a legal defeat; it was a moral indictment of Holomisa’s tactics. The South African Venture and Private Capital Association (SAVCA) added further weight, confirming Harith’s fee structures were “in line with industry standards,” with no breaches of its Code of Conduct. A forensic probe by Crowe Forensics SA and Advocate Terry Motau SC echoed this, finding no evidence of excessive fees or impropriety. Finally, in 2023, the joint PIC-GEPF forensic report delivered the coup de grâce, concluding there was “no evidence to support allegations of impropriety” against Mahloele, Harith, or Moleketi. Harith’s CEO, Sipho Makhubela, called it the “only logical destination” for an honest inquiry. Yet, despite these five clearances, Holomisa remained defiant, offering no apology, no retraction—only a stubborn refusal to face the truth.

The Catastrophic Fallout

The consequences of Holomisa’s lies were staggering. Mahloele estimates losses in the hundreds of millions of rands, as reported to BizNews, from aborted deals and severed partnerships. Harith, a pioneer in African infrastructure—funding projects like renewable energy and transport networks—saw its pipeline grind to a halt. Investors, wary of political risk, pulled back, leaving initiatives that could have created thousands of jobs in limbo. Employees faced uncertainty, their livelihoods tied to a firm under siege. For Mahloele, the personal toll was profound: a black entrepreneur who navigated post-apartheid barriers to build a globally respected firm was publicly vilified, his achievements twisted into a narrative of greed. The broader economic impact is equally dire. South Africa lost R200 billion in potential foreign direct investment (FDI) in 2023 due to perceived instability, per Treasury figures, with Holomisa’s reckless claims contributing to this chilling effect. Pensioners, whom he claimed to champion, suffered indirectly as delayed infrastructure projects slowed economic growth and job creation. Beyond economics, Holomisa’s actions eroded public trust. By fabricating scandals, he diluted genuine anti-corruption efforts, fostering cynicism that paints all leaders as corrupt. His smears also struck a blow to BEE, undermining black entrepreneurs like Mahloele who embody its promise. This wasn’t just a personal vendetta; it was an assault on South Africa’s economic and democratic aspirations, leaving scars that linger long after the headlines faded.

A Pattern of Political Malpractice

Holomisa’s crusade against Mahloele is not an isolated misstep but part of a troubling pattern. Born in 1955, he rose as a Transkei military leader during apartheid, later joining the ANC before his 1996 expulsion for criticizing its leadership. Founding the UDM in 1997 amid his own corruption controversies, Holomisa has long positioned himself as a moral outlier. Yet, his career is littered with unsubstantiated allegations, from past feuds with ANC figures to this latest debacle. Political analyst Dr. Ralph Mathekga describes Holomisa’s “tendency to overreach” as a bid for relevance, noting that with the UDM holding just four seats post-2024 elections, his bombast risks alienating coalition partners in South Africa’s new multiparty landscape. Public sentiment, reflected on platforms like X, is scathing: #HolomisaLies trended briefly in 2023, with users condemning his “apartheid-era bully tactics.” Even within the UDM, younger members whisper of a leadership change, frustrated by Holomisa’s refusal to evolve. His silence in the face of five clearances reveals a man unmoored from accountability, clinging to outdated struggle credentials while wielding influence with reckless abandon. This pattern of deceit not only tarnishes his legacy but undermines the opposition’s credibility at a critical juncture for South Africa’s democracy.

The Urgent Need for Reform

Holomisa’s impunity exposes a systemic flaw in South Africa’s democratic framework. Parliamentary privilege, designed to protect robust debate, becomes a weapon when abused, shielding figures like Holomisa from libel suits while their victims suffer. The Constitutional Court’s ruling was a clarion call: privilege is not a blank check for defamation. Yet, without stronger deterrents, such abuses will persist. Proposals for reform include empowering parliamentary ethics committees to impose fines or suspensions for malicious falsehoods, or mandating fact-checking protocols for MPs’ public statements. Mahloele’s advocacy for US-style punitive damages—exemplary awards to punish and deter—gains traction here. Imagine if Holomisa faced financial ruin mirroring the hundreds of millions his lies cost Harith; such consequences could force politicians to weigh their words. Beyond legal reforms, cultural shifts are needed. South Africa’s media, often complicit in amplifying unverified claims, must prioritize evidence over sensationalism. Political parties, including the UDM, should enforce internal accountability, sidelining leaders who prioritize personal agendas over public good. In a coalition-driven era post-2024, Holomisa’s antics threaten fragile alliances, making reform not just desirable but urgent to safeguard democracy from opportunists.

The Broader Implications

Holomisa’s actions ripple beyond Mahloele, striking at the heart of South Africa’s challenges. Corruption, from Eskom’s blackouts to crumbling municipalities, remains a national scourge, but fabricating scandals like Holomisa’s dilutes genuine whistleblowing, making it harder for real victims to be heard. His lies exacerbate public cynicism, convincing citizens that all politicians are untrustworthy—a dangerous sentiment in a young democracy. Economically, his smears deter investment at a time when South Africa desperately needs capital to address unemployment (33% in 2024, per Stats SA) and inequality. Harith’s stalled projects, from broadband networks to renewable energy, represent lost opportunities for growth and redress, particularly for marginalized communities. For BEE, Holomisa’s attack on Mahloele sends a chilling message: black success is vulnerable to political sabotage. In a global context, his recklessness fuels perceptions of South Africa as a risky investment destination, compounding the FDI losses that hinder progress. Politically, as coalitions reshape governance, Holomisa’s divisiveness risks alienating partners like the DA and IFP, who view him as a liability. His actions thus threaten not just individuals but the nation’s economic recovery, democratic stability, and social cohesion.

A Call for Justice

Mahloele’s push for punitive damages is more than a personal quest; it’s a demand for systemic justice. “A proper deterrent is needed,” he told BizNews, “to force appropriate consequences onto those who destroy through propagating falsehoods.” His case highlights the need for mechanisms to hold politicians accountable—not just in court, but in the public square. Holomisa’s refusal to retract, despite overwhelming evidence, underscores his arrogance and the system’s failure to curb it. Legal victories, like Harith’s five clearances, offer partial relief, but without tangible penalties, they’re hollow. Punitive damages could set a precedent, signaling that lies have a price. Beyond finances, Holomisa’s political survival is in question. With the UDM’s relevance waning and public outrage growing—evident in editorials from Mail & Guardian to Daily Maverick—his leadership hangs by a thread. Voters, tired of drama over delivery, may sideline him in future elections. Justice, then, lies not just in courts but in the court of public opinion, where Holomisa’s legacy as a defamer is cemented.

Conclusion

Bantu Holomisa’s five-year defamation campaign against Tshepo Mahloele is a stark warning for South Africa. Five clearances, including a Constitutional Court rebuke, expose his allegations as malicious lies, yet he remains unaccountable, leaving Harith and Mahloele to bear losses in the hundreds of millions. His actions crippled a black-owned firm, stalled vital infrastructure, and eroded trust in a democracy still finding its footing. This isn’t just a personal vendetta; it’s a betrayal of public interest, diluting anti-corruption efforts and deterring investment. Holomisa’s pattern of deceit, rooted in a desperate bid for relevance, threatens coalition stability and BEE’s promise. Punitive damages and systemic reforms—stronger ethics oversight, media responsibility—are critical to deter future abuses. South Africa deserves leaders who build, not destroy; who speak truth, not lies. Holomisa, unrepentant and exposed, is neither. His legacy, once tied to liberation, is now a cautionary tale of unchecked power and the urgent need for accountability.

Written by

Aiden Cross

Updated

3 months ago

I am a cybersecurity analyst who investigates and exposes online fraud and scams. I track suspicious activity and uncover hidden risks to help protect individuals and organizations from digital threats.