South African Veterinary Council election process under scrutiny, Minster requests report from Agriculture department

Minister of Agriculture John Steenhuisen has taken action to address governance concerns stemming from the recent election process of the South African Veterinary Council (SAVC), following reports of procedural irregularities and a lack of transparency.

Steenhuisen, in a statement, said concerns had been raised regarding the integrity of the election process, including “inconsistent and conflicting communications to registered veterinary professionals regarding voting deadlines that created confusion and may have resulted in the exclusion of some eligible participants.”

The Minister also cited concerns about candidate eligibility, the independence of the verification process, and the overall credibility of the selection panel. “Stakeholders have also alleged that the process lacked sufficient clarity and accessibility, potentially undermining the representation and legitimacy of the council,” the statement said.

The statement added that according to the SAVC Election Regulations, the Registrar is responsible for ensuring that nominations comply with legal requirements, that candidates are nominated by enfranchised voters, and that nominees meet the criteria set out in Section 6 of the governing Act.

“The onus was therefore on the Registrar to ensure compliance with these provisions,” Steenhuisen said.

He said that the situation warranted “consideration of whether an inquiry into the Registrar’s conduct should be instituted, including whether costs arising from flawed processes should be borne personally by the officeholder responsible.”

As part of his oversight duties, Steenhuisen has requested a full report from the Department of Agriculture, including legal advice on the validity of the election, and has briefed the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Agriculture.

He has also formally requested that the Department’s Director-General prepare to restart the election process “should legal advice not conclusively endorse the validity of the current process.”

“Good governance is not optional; it is foundational,” said Steenhuisen.

“Public confidence in statutory regulatory bodies such as the SAVC rests on transparent, credible, and procedurally fair processes. My actions are intended to ensure that these standards are upheld without compromise.”

He added that he was committed to working with stakeholders in the veterinary profession “to restore trust in the SAVC and ensure that future elections reflect the highest standards of accountability and independence.”

THE MERCURY