Deputy President Paul Mashatile has dismissed accusations that he is using his political office to accumulate wealth or fund a luxurious lifestyle.
Speaking during the opening of the Inkosi Simingaye Shopping Centre near Cato Ridge in KwaXimba, west of Durban, Mashatile responded to growing public scrutiny over his financial disclosures.
His remarks followed parliamentary debates linking him to high-value properties, including a Cape Town estate in Constantia and another in Midrand’s Waterfall development.
The controversy stems from the June 2025 release of the Register of Members’ Interests, where Mashatile declared two luxury homes collectively worth around R65 million. This raised eyebrows, given his annual salary of just over R3 million.
The Constantia estate, valued at R28.9 million, has been a particular focus. Mashatile previously stated the property is owned by a company linked to his son-in-law.
The second property, reportedly worth R37 million, is situated in Midrand. His declarations have sparked debate on the transparency of public officials and the extent of their wealth.
Mashatile insisted that neither property was bought using government funds. He maintained that he resides in the Constantia home but does not own it, reiterating that it is privately owned by his family and not related to the state.
He stressed that his government income is his only source of earnings and that he is focused on development work, not personal property disputes.
These denials come at a time when public concern over the enrichment of senior government officials is growing.
Adding to the pressure, Parliament’s Ethics Committee recently fined Mashatile R10,000 for failing to declare a diamond gift given to his wife by businessman Louis Liebenberg.
The complaint, lodged in March 2025, accused him of violating the Code of Ethical Conduct by omitting the gift from his financial disclosures.
Although Mashatile claimed he delayed the declaration pending a formal appraisal and later handed the diamond over to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the committee found that the disclosure still fell outside of the required timeframe.
As part of its ruling, the Ethics Committee recommended a formal reprimand in the National Assembly, underscoring the importance of transparency and accountability in public office. Parliament has confirmed that the committee’s full findings will be published in its official records.
