BY SIFISO NHLABATSI
MBABANE– Prime Minister Russell Mmiso Dlamini has defended government’s decision to establish a Commission of Enquiry into the affairs of the Eswatini Medical Christian University (EMCU), maintaining that the process complied with the law and that the institution’s urgent court application is based on inaccurate claims and self-created urgency.
This is contained in the Prime Minister’s answering affidavit filed in response to an urgent High Court application brought by the university’s Council seeking to halt the commission.
Dlamini told the court that the commission was lawfully appointed through a Government Gazette Notice published on June 15, 2026, and rejected allegations that no terms of reference had been made available before the commission was introduced.
He stated that the terms of reference were contained in the published notice, adding that the Government Gazette is a public document that was available several days before the court application was launched.
“The committee’s terms of reference are embodied in the notice,” the Prime Minister stated in his affidavit.
He further argued that the university had ample opportunity to obtain the Gazette and verify the legal position before approaching the court on an urgent basis.
According to the Prime Minister, the university’s allegations of urgency are unfounded because it had been aware of the commission for several days before filing the application.
Dlamini further argued that any challenge to the legality of the commission could still be brought while the commission is conducting its work or even after it has completed its investigations.
He submitted that allowing the commission to begin its work would not cause irreparable prejudice to the university, as judicial review proceedings remain available.
The Prime Minister also disputed the legal standing of the applicant, arguing that while the Education Council is established under the Higher Education Act, it is not a corporate body with legal personality or statutory authority to sue and be sued in its own name.
He stated that higher education institutions and their governing councils are created by statute, but the legislation does not confer legal personality upon them.
Addressing the reasons behind the appointment of the commission, Dlamini said Cabinet resolved that an inquiry should investigate the affairs of the university after receiving numerous complaints concerning its governance and management.
He attached documents to his affidavit, including a report from the university’s Vice Chancellor, correspondence from the Chairperson of the Education Council, and a memorandum from the Principal Secretary in the Cabinet Office detailing complaints relating to the institution.
The Prime Minister said the commission was established to investigate allegations of maladministration and other governance concerns affecting the university.
He added that the university receives a substantial government subvention, making it necessary for government to institute the inquiry.
Responding to claims that the commission duplicates other ongoing investigations, Dlamini maintained that there is no legal prohibition against multiple investigations running concurrently.
He said commissions of enquiry can lawfully exist alongside parliamentary inquiries, disciplinary proceedings, civil litigation and criminal investigations.
According to the affidavit, the existence of investigations by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) does not prevent the commission from carrying out its mandate.
The Prime Minister further disclosed that he was aware of the ACC investigation and confirmed that the commission was appointed before the ACC executed a search and seizure operation at the university.
He stated that the ACC’s investigation is criminal in nature, whereas the commission has a broader mandate to investigate allegations of maladministration.
Dlamini also rejected allegations of bias against Commissioners Mbuso Simelane and Mangaliso Magagula.
He told the court that both commissioners were appointed on the basis of their professional competence and expertise and that they publicly disclosed during their introduction that they had previously worked with the university.
The Prime Minister added that the commissioners would recuse themselves should any conflict of interest arise during the inquiry.
He further rejected arguments that he lacked authority to appoint the commission.
According to Dlamini, the Prime Minister is also a minister under Eswatini’s constitutional framework and therefore falls within the meaning of “any Minister” as contemplated by the Commissions of Enquiry Act.
He stated that the executive branch operates under the Westminster system, where the Prime Minister serves as “first among equals” while remaining a minister.
Dlamini maintained that all statutory requirements governing the appointment of the commission were complied with and denied bypassing any ministerial role prescribed by law.
He also disputed allegations that Cabinet approval was legally required before appointing the commission, although he stated that Cabinet nevertheless approved the appointment out of what he described as “an abundance of caution.”
The Prime Minister argued that the commission serves the public interest by investigating serious governance concerns affecting a publicly funded institution.
He denied that the university would suffer reputational harm as a result of the inquiry, stating that allegations of maladministration, poor governance and misappropriation of funds had already attracted public attention.
Supporting the Prime Minister’s opposition is a confirmatory affidavit by ACC investigator Vulindlela Dlamini.
The investigator told the court that the ACC has been investigating the university since 2024 following numerous complaints lodged with the commission. He stated that the ACC obtained and executed a search and seizure warrant on June 19, 2026, as part of its investigation.
According to the investigator, electronic devices seized during the operation were examined by experts before being returned to the university and its management on June 29, 2026. The respondents are opposing the university’s application and are asking the High Court to allow the Commission of Enquiry to continue with its work.
(Courtesy Pic)
