Deputy Finance Minister David Masondo has resigned as PIC Chairperson, but Alec Hogg argues this is a strategic exit, not a clean one. With the CEO and acting CIO suspended, the FSCA investigating, directors resigning and a court date looming this week, Masondo used his final act to flag unresolved allegations rather than let them disappear with the dissolved board. The DA says his exit changes nothing without the structural reform its Pension Protection Bill demands.
By Alec Hogg
Dr David Masondo has resigned as Chairperson of the Public Investment Corporation. If you read between the lines of a statement issued this morning by the deputy finance minister, it was not a quiet, dignified exit of the kind Pretoria likes to stage-manage. He is positioning himself as actually protecting further damage to an institution through himself becoming the story.
To understand how we got here, it’s worth going back just a week when I sat down with DA finance spokesperson Dr Mark Burke to unpack what he called the PIC’s worst governance crisis since the Mpati Commission — you can watch the full conversation here: Director’s Cut — Dr Mark Burke: What is behind the governance crisis at the R3.5 trillion PIC.
At that point, the CEO Patrick Dlamini and Acting Chief Investment Officer August van Heerden had just been placed on precautionary suspension over a “whistleblower” complaint that was itself breathtaking – Dlamini was suspended after commissioning an investigation into a dodgy deal where some PIC staffers and political bigwigs had benefitted.
Finance Minister, Enoch Godongwana – essentially Masondo’s boss, was having none of it. The Financial Sector Conduct Authority announced a formal Section 135 investigation into the PIC’s governance, leadership and transparency — an unprecedented step of one state institution formally investigating another.
Burke told me nine of the PIC’s eleven board members had voted for Dlamini’s suspension. He pointed out, too, that two directors – presumably appalled at the callous attack on a CEO who was just doing his job – resigned within hours.
The DA finance spokesman’s read was that this is factional warfare that has been playing out for close on two months, pitting a camp aligned with Masondo against one aligned with the Minister of Finance — with Dlamini, on Burke’s account, enjoying the Minister’s backing and not the Deputy Minister’s. That tension helps explain why Masondo, rather than the suspended executives, is the one who has now fallen on his sword.
Masondo’s statement says he served “at the pleasure of the shareholder minister” — a polite way of reminding everyone that the Minister of Finance holds the power to appoint the chair of South Africa’s most important asset manager, and that power was exercised.
He’s careful to note the Minister “recognised” that he acted with integrity and in good faith. Read that again. It’s not an admission of wrongdoing dressed up as a resignation letter — it’s a man making sure history records that he wasn’t pushed out for misconduct, even as he’s clearly been pushed out.
What matters more than the politics of his exit is what he refused to let go quietly. Masondo used his last act as Chair to flag, in writing, every loose thread the previous Board was pulling on: a whistleblower report, allegations against the CEO, and the “Acapulco matter” — which he says he personally referred to the Special Investigating Unit.
Some of this lands in the High Court on Tuesday. His parting shot was essentially a plea that none of it gets swept under the carpet now that the Board that opened these cans of worms has been dissolved. That’s not the language of someone confident the new order will finish what he started.
Then there’s the GEPF, the PIC’s biggest client, sitting on the retirement savings of every teacher, nurse, soldier and civil servant in the country. Its statement today is a masterclass in saying a lot while committing to very little.
It “respects” the PIC’s autonomy on leadership matters — diplomatic code for “we have no legal say over who runs the show, however uncomfortable that is.” But it also admits it is “concerned” the board upheaval could affect decision-making on GEPF’s investments, and confirms it is now in direct talks with both the PIC and the Minister of Finance “to seek assurance” nothing has been compromised.
That’s the GEPF nudging, publicly, because it can’t instruct. It has an investment management agreement setting out mandate, risk parameters and performance expectations, but no seat at the boardroom table when that boardroom implodes.
The one line its members will care about most: pensions and benefits are unaffected. Fair enough — that’s an administrative function, largely insulated from governance drama at head office. Whether the same can be said of the PIC’s unlisted portfolio, the part of the book that has caused most of the institution’s historical pain, going back to the Mpati Commission, is a different question entirely, and one the GEPF didn’t address.
This is where Burke’s “elephant and mouse” framing is useful.
Around 95% of the PIC’s book sits in listed investments — a highly regulated space where scandals like Steinhoff are the exception. It’s the unlisted Isibaya Fund, barely 5% of the total, where the controls disappear and, on Burke’s telling, so does the money.
He rattled off the case list: the Daybreak transaction; the Enable Capital deal, which he calls an outright scam costing more than R100 million; the Lanseria transaction, where an underperforming asset somehow saw the PIC pay a BEE partner north of R500 million for shares against a roughly R400 million loan owed; a board secretary with outsized influence over contracts, pushed out under a cloud and then reappointed despite a Mpati Commission recommendation that the appointment be reassessed; and a R10 million exit package for a former executive, Roy Mnisi, who also left under a cloud.
It’s this unlisted corner, not the well-run listed side, that keeps producing scandals — and where Burke says 16 of the last 32 investments made since 2022 have lost value, with the portfolio as a whole underperforming inflation.
Burke’s Parliamentary task team has been pushing for two years for a chairperson who isn’t a political deployee — a recommendation that goes back to Mpati. Masondo’s exit, whatever its immediate cause, at least opens the door to that.
The DA isn’t leaving it there. Andrew Bateman, the party’s Deputy Spokesperson on Appropriations, put out a statement within hours of the resignation, making the point bluntly: Masondo going is “a significant development, but it is not enough to restore confidence” in an institution managing over R3 trillion of public servants’ savings.
His list of what’s broken reads like Burke’s, compressed into a single paragraph — CEO and CIO suspended, whistleblower allegations, the FSCA investigation, non-executive directors resigning, and now the Chair gone too, all inside a few weeks.
Bateman’s argument is that a new board, however credible, is treating the symptom. “Changing the board without changing the law will not fix the PIC,” he says, and without structural reform “South Africa will relive the same crisis every few years.” His remedy is the DA’s Pension Protection Bill, already lodged with Parliament’s legal services, which would legislate exactly what Burke has been demanding informally: an independent, non-executive Chair rather than a serving politician, merit-based board appointments, and less room for political interference generally.
His near-term ask is narrower and more urgent — stabilise the PIC, appoint a credible board, let the investigations run without interference, and come clean on how much of the Mpati Commission’s recommendations were actually implemented in the unlisted Isibaya portfolio.
What we’re left with is an institution managing roughly R3.5 trillion of workers’ money, its Chair just walked, its CEO and acting CIO suspended, its regulator now formally investigating it, a court date looms this week, and the shareholder — the state, via the Finance Minister — now has to appoint a new Board while all of this plays out in public.
Masondo says he leaves with confidence in the PIC. The DA says a new board changes nothing without new law. The rest of us should probably reserve judgment until we see who replaces him, whether Parliament actually moves on the Pension Protection Bill, whether the SIU widens its net beyond Daybreak, and what the courts find on Tuesday.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. Register here.
Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.
If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.
Leave a Reply