By Mosa Cibi
Herman Mashaba has made his opposition to Black Economic Empowerment the loudest note in ActionSA’s political song. He speaks with the conviction of a man who built himself from nothing and believes everyone else can too. But conviction is not policy.
When you examine what the Action BEE challenge actually means for black South Africans in stagnant cities, a troubling picture emerges. BEE is not just facing a trial in the court of public opinion; it is facing a pincer movement from politicians and the judiciary alike.
B-BBEE targets under siege: A legal and political pincer movement
ActionSA’s anti-BEE messaging does not exist in a vacuum. It emboldens a broader project to delegitimise transformation as a legal framework. Currently, four major law firms—Deneys Reitz, Webber Wentzel, Werksmans Attorneys, and Bowmans—are challenging the government in the Pretoria High Court. They argue that revised B-BBEE targets, which require 50% black ownership within five years, are “irrational.”
This legal pushback coincides with Mashaba’s rhetoric, providing political cover for those seeking to dismantle the system. At the same time, allegations of discrimination within the legal profession have intensified, suggesting that BEE’s importance cannot be underestimated. Black lawyers continue to report systemic barriers, proving that without legislative pressure, the “meritocracy” often defaults to old-boy networks.
Dismantling BEE compliance: Pulling the ladder up on black excellence
Mashaba’s story is one of individual success against structural odds. He built Black Like Me when black entrepreneurship was suppressed. Yet, his current project seeks to scrap the very policies designed to counter that exclusion. ActionSA argues that BEE has primarily enriched a politically connected elite—labeling it “ANC Economic Empowerment.”
While elite capture is a valid critique, Mashaba’s solution is not to fix the system but to delete it. This raises a vital question: what replaces the pressure it created? In Mashaba’s South Africa, the answer appears to be very little.
Urban procurement and the fight for inclusive job creation
South African cities are powerful economic actors. Every rand spent on infrastructure is a choice about who benefits. BEE policies ensure a portion of this power flows toward black-owned businesses. Mashaba’s stance removes this lever. Without transformation obligations, city contracts naturally flow toward established firms with deep balance sheets—firms that, due to the legacy of Apartheid, remain disproportionately white-owned.
Justice Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi recently addressed this “resistance” to change. After engaging with legal practitioners, she noted that many barriers—from racist treatment to biased briefing patterns—still restrict black and female lawyers. She insists the government is “not prepared to compromise” on these goals, as black women remain the most economically vulnerable.
Why ActionSA’s Opportunity Fund and the 3% BEE levy fall short
ActionSA proposes an “Opportunity Fund”—a 3% levy on private sector profits—to replace BEE compliance. However, this mirrors a controversial government proposal. Trade and Industry Minister Parks Tau recently gazetted a voluntary 3% revenue levy on unlisted companies to fuel a central Transformation Fund.
This has sparked fierce debate. We see a strong DA opposition to BEE levy proposals, with the party arguing that such costs cripple job creation. While the models differ, the risk is the same: empowerment becomes a “tick-box” exercise of writing a cheque rather than diversifying ownership and management.
Global criticism and local reality
The issue has drawn international eyes, with criticism from Donal Trump and Elon Musk who have questioned the fairness of rase-based policies. Musk’s comparisons of BEE to Apartheid-era laws met sharp South African push back, while Trump’s criticism and subsequent sanctions have added external pressure to an already volatile internal debate.
Conclusion: Transformation deferred is transformation denied
Transformation requires sustained, legally enforceable pressure. BEE and Employment Equity represent the floor of that transformation, not the ceiling. Mashaba, alongside litigants in the High Court, wants to remove that floor.
In cities where black communities still wait for the promises of 1994, weakening these policies is a mistake. We do not need a smaller commitment to transformation; we need a more effective one. We must defend the principle of inclusion before the politicians and the courts finish the job of dismantling it together.
