South Africa's Public Works and Infrastructure Minister, Dean Macpherson, has stated that taxpayers will not be responsible for maintaining former President Jacob Zuma's private Nkandla residence. In response to a parliamentary question from former MK Party MP Pumlani Kubukeli, Macpherson emphasized that the state's responsibility is limited to security-related infrastructure. Kubukeli had inquired about the condition of Zuma's KwaZulu-Natal residence, alleging significant deterioration due to the department's failure to conduct regular maintenance.
Macpherson rejected the premise that maintaining the private property was the department's responsibility, citing the 2014 Secure in Comfort report by former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela. The report investigated the use of public money for upgrades at Zuma's private residence and found that R246m of public funds had been improperly spent. Macpherson noted that the report articulated that certain upgrades, such as chicken coops, cattle kraals, and swimming pools, were not the department's responsibility.
The Constitutional Court subsequently held in 2016 that several improvements identified by the public protector were non-security features and that Zuma had to contribute towards their costs. The court also found that Zuma's failure to comply with the public protector's remedial action was inconsistent with the constitution. Macpherson emphasized that the non-security upgrades should never have been the department's responsibility.
Macpherson stated that the department was aware of its obligations regarding security at national key points and the private residences of former heads of state. He noted that maintenance work at the private residences of all former presidents is limited to security installations as determined and requested by the South African Police Service.
According to Macpherson, there had been no failure by his department that would require President Cyril Ramaphosa's intervention. He welcomed Zuma to contact the Presidency or his office for further clarity, emphasizing that there was no need for the president to be involved in the matter.
The upgrades to Zuma's Nkandla homestead became a major political and legal dispute during his presidency, with state expenditure on the property ballooning. Madonsela's report found that Zuma and his family had unduly benefitted from upgrades that went beyond legitimate security requirements.
After an assessment by National Treasury, Zuma repaid about R7.8m towards the cost of non-security upgrades in 2016. The non-security features at the centre of the dispute included a swimming pool, a cattle kraal, chicken run, amphitheatre, and visitors' centre.
Key points
- Taxpayers will not cover maintenance costs for former President Jacob Zuma's private Nkandla residence.
- The state's responsibility is limited to security-related infrastructure at the Nkandla residence.
- Zuma had repaid about R7.8m towards the cost of non-security upgrades in 2016.
