The Patriotic Alliance has dismissed a Public Protector complaint filed by the Democratic Alliance against Sport, Arts and Culture Minister Gayton McKenzie.
The Gayton McKenzie Public Protector complaint centres on alleged conflicts of interest involving public grant allocations and departmental spending linked to the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The PA denies wrongdoing and says the claims lack evidence.
DA Files Complaint Against McKenzie
The DA filed its complaint on Thursday, 23 July 2026, alleging possible violations of the Executive Members’ Ethics Act and Executive Ethics Code.
According to the DA, three of the six members appointed to the 2025/26 Mzansi Golden Economy adjudication panel were active PA members. They included PA national spokesperson Steve Motale, Vernon Vraagom and Francisco Tejada.
The panel oversaw the allocation of nearly R110 million through the MGE grants programme. However, the amount represents the funding administered by the programme and does not, by itself, prove that the money was stolen or misappropriated.
The Gayton McKenzie Public Protector complaint also raises questions about approximately R31 million in estimated expenditure connected to South Africa’s FIFA World Cup delegation. The DA said the department disclosed that 20 artists and 18 officials formed part of the delegation.
PA Says Allegations Lack Evidence
Motale rejected the complaint and accused the DA of recycling allegations to damage McKenzie and the PA before the municipal elections.
“This investigation is nonsense and the Public Protector’s outcomes will prove that,” Motale said.
He maintained that McKenzie had responded to parliamentary questions and challenged the DA to produce evidence of wrongdoing. Motale also claimed previous complaints against the minister had failed.
Parliament Raised Concerns About MGE Process
Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture previously questioned the MGE panel’s composition and whether the department followed its appointment policy.
Committee members also raised concerns about newly registered or non-compliant companies receiving funding. They recommended that payments should not proceed before further compliance checks.
However, Parliament’s concerns did not constitute a finding of corruption against McKenzie.
Public Protector Must Assess Complaint
The Public Protector’s office must now assess whether the Gayton McKenzie Public Protector complaint falls within its jurisdiction and has enough merit for a formal investigation.
A complaint does not establish guilt, and no adverse finding against McKenzie has been announced in this matter.