The Mandlanga Commission: A Scapegoat to Protect the Corrupt — The Politics of Illusion in South Africa

 

Abstract

 

The establishment of the Mandlanga Commission of Inquiry, though ostensibly a pursuit of justice, reflects a recurring pattern in South Africa’s governance landscape where commissions become instruments of political theatre rather than vehicles of transformation. This article argues that the Commission, while publicly framed as a moral intervention, functions more as a scapegoat mechanism—deflecting accountability, managing public outrage, and preserving the interests of political elites implicated in systemic corruption. Drawing on historical precedents, theological reflection, and sociopolitical analysis, the study contends that South Africa’s recurring “commission culture” symbolizes a deeper crisis of moral governance, where truth is often performed rather than practiced.

 

1. Introduction

 

In contemporary South African political discourse, commissions of inquiry have become synonymous with state responses to scandal, corruption, and public distrust. The Mandlanga Commission, established in 2025 under the chairmanship of retired Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, was tasked with investigating alleged criminal infiltration and political interference in the justice system. While publicly hailed as a step toward transparency, the Commission’s formation was met with skepticism, with critics suggesting it serves as a symbolic scapegoat rather than a genuine corrective mechanism.

 

This paper explores how such commissions reflect the tension between appearance and accountability, justice and justification, and the illusion of reform in democratic governance. It argues that the Mandlanga Commission epitomizes a political strategy where the state uses inquiry structures to manage legitimacy while shielding deeper networks of corruption.

 

2. Theoretical Framework: The Scapegoat Mechanism

 

The concept of the scapegoat, drawn from both theology (Leviticus 16) and sociology (Girard, 1972), denotes a process in which collective guilt or failure is symbolically transferred to a visible object or person, thus relieving systemic pressure without genuine transformation. In modern governance, commissions of inquiry can operate as such scapegoats—appeasing public anger while avoiding structural reform. They give the impression of accountability, yet their outcomes are often diluted, delayed, or disregarded.

 

Within South Africa, where political corruption has eroded institutional trust, commissions function as rituals of legitimacy. They allow political actors to demonstrate moral concern without surrendering actual power. Thus, the Mandlanga Commission becomes both a performative symbol of justice and a protective shield for entrenched elites.

 

3. Historical and Political Context

 

Since 1994, South Africa has convened numerous commissions—such as the Zondo Commission (State Capture), the Marikana Commission, and the Seriti Arms Deal Commission—each addressing crises of governance. While many unveiled significant truths, few resulted in lasting accountability. This historical trend suggests that such commissions, though legally grounded, are often politically instrumentalized.

 

The Mandlanga Commission, initiated in response to KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s allegations of criminal infiltration in state institutions, inherits this ambiguous legacy. While its mandate appears noble—probing corruption within the criminal justice system—its timing, structure, and selective focus raise questions about its genuine intent. Rather than dismantling the roots of institutional decay, it risks reinforcing the perception that justice in South Africa is selective, staged, and politically negotiated.

 

4. Political Symbolism and Public Perception

 

Public discourse increasingly frames the Commission as part of a political “movie”—a repetitive drama in which justice is enacted but rarely realized. The metaphor reflects societal fatigue with cyclical exposure of corruption followed by minimal consequence. Each new inquiry renews hope, only to reproduce disappointment. Thus, the Commission becomes not merely a legal tool but a sociological performance, dramatizing accountability to pacify the public while real power remains untouched.

 

The “movie” analogy further captures how political spectacle replaces substantive reform. Leaders play their roles; media amplifies the script; and citizens watch a familiar plot unfold—investigation, revelation, and silence.

 

5. Theological and Moral Reflection

 

From a theological standpoint, this phenomenon echoes prophetic critiques in Scripture:

 

> “Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off; for truth is fallen in the street” (Isaiah 59:14).

 

In biblical terms, when institutions substitute performance for righteousness, society suffers moral decay. Genuine transformation requires repentance, integrity, and truthfulness—qualities that transcend bureaucratic formality. The moral failure of governance is not procedural but spiritual; it reveals the absence of moral conviction among leaders who prefer ritualized justice to real accountability.

 

Faith-based ethics remind the nation that justice cannot thrive where truth is politically managed. To believe in justice is to align governance with divine principles of truth, mercy, and fairness. Hence, the prophetic task of the church and civil society is to expose illusion and demand authenticity.

 

6. The Crisis of Institutional Integrity

 

The Mandlanga Commission’s struggles—budget shortfalls, administrative delays, and potential political interference—mirror a broader collapse of institutional trust. When oversight mechanisms become compromised, democracy deteriorates into administrative ritualism. Citizens begin to perceive inquiries as distractions rather than instruments of reform. In such a climate, the illusion of justice becomes more dangerous than injustice itself, because it pacifies resistance while perpetuating corruption.

 

7. Conclusion

 

The Mandlanga Commission represents both a hope and a warning. It symbolizes the nation’s yearning for truth but also its entrapment in cycles of procedural symbolism. If its purpose remains confined to optics, it will serve as a scapegoat for systemic corruption—a “movie” of justice designed to entertain public trust without transforming moral reality.

 

True accountability requires that commissions evolve from performative inquiry to transformative justice. Until then, South Africa risks remaining a society where corruption is exposed for spectacle, not eradicated for righteousness.

 

"We may seem far but we are closer, authentic observers we shall remain until Africa is total free".

 

References (Selected)

 

Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977.

 

Holy Bible, Isaiah 59:14; Leviticus 16; Romans 12:2.

 

Government Gazette (South Africa), Proclamation No. 269 of 2025.

 

Mkhwanazi, Nhlanhla. Public Statement, Durban Press Briefing, 6 July 2025.

 

Justice Department of South Africa (2025). “Terms of Reference: Judicial Commission into Criminality and Corruption in the Justice System.”

 

Zondo, R. (2022). State Capture Report, Vol. 1–4. Johannesburg: Government Printing Works.

 

Prof Owen O.L