There is something almost reassuringly familiar about South African Airways (SAA) appointing an acting CEO. The national carrier now has its third group CEO in four months, after Matshela Seshibe was abruptly placed on special leave on Friday and chief legal officer Koekie Mbeki put in the cockpit.
The problem is not that Mbeki, a lawyer who has spent about a decade at SAA, is obviously incapable. It is that nobody outside the board seems to know what is going on. Seshibe says the internal process concerns matters arising from his tenure at Air Chefs, SAA’s catering subsidiary, but that the allegations have not yet formally been put to him. Reports suggest an anonymous whistleblower complaint concerning procurement.
That is awkward enough. More awkward is the context. SAA and SAA Technical received disclaimer audit opinions for 2024/2025, while Air Chefs received a qualified opinion with findings. The auditor-general highlighted poor financial reporting, weak control and procurement failure across the group. Seshibe had been elevated from Air Chefs to replace John Lamola only in April.
Lamola’s own permanent appointment had been politically fraught. He was chosen in 2025 despite reportedly scoring below other candidates in assessments, leading to accusations that transport minister Barbara Creecy and Deputy President Paul Mashatile had interfered. The public protector subsequently found no evidence of improper interference. Lamola then resigned abruptly in April, alongside three board members, as the airline’s accounts came under renewed scrutiny.
None of this proves a factional squabble or an act of revenge, tempting though those explanations may be. But the board’s sphinx-like communication almost guarantees that such theories will flourish.
More importantly, this is not merely a PR problem. I’m told that contacts at two aircraft manufacturers regard the handling of the latest episode as actively damaging SAA’s credibility, with the potential to unsettle banks, aircraft lessors and insurers.
That matters enormously. SAA’s stated ambition is to expand its fleet dramatically over the next few years without leaning on further sovereign guarantees.
Airlines do not finance expansion on patriotic sentiment. They do it on creditworthiness, predictable governance and the confidence of counterparties who can put their aircraft and money elsewhere. The shareholder has tasked the board with overseeing an expansion from about 20 aircraft to more than 50 by 2030 without new sovereign guarantees.
SAA has survived bankruptcy, business rescue, state capture and Covid. The extraordinary thing is that it is flying at all. But if the board wants the airline treated as a normal commercial enterprise, it must start behaving like one.
At the moment, the passengers may know where SAA is flying. Its financiers plainly do not.
