The DA continued paying salary top-ups to serving cabinet ministers and senior party leaders despite receiving a legal opinion warning that the practice could contravene the constitution and the executive ethics code.
Confidential documents seen by the Sunday Times show that advocate Michael Bishop advised the party in September last year that payments to members of the national executive for party work could violate section 96(2)(a) of the constitution, which prohibits ministers and deputy ministers from performing “any other paid work”.
“It is impossible to advise authoritatively on whether paying members of the executive for party work is lawful or not,” Bishop wrote. “The issue is debatable, and until it is considered by a court, the legality of receiving the payments will be uncertain.”
The legal opinion formed part of internal discussions within the DA over payments made to ministers, MPs and public representatives holding party positions.
The payments are detailed in a separate confidential report compiled by former DA federal finance chair Dion George and presented to the party’s federal executive on December 20 last year.
According to the report, deputy finance minister Ashor Sarupen was approved for a gross monthly payment of R50,000 — from October 1 last year — for his role as the DA’s national campaign manager for the coming 2026 elections.
Parliamentary rules require MPs receiving remuneration for outside work to obtain permission from their chief whip and disclose the payments
Werner Horn, the National Assembly house chair, was approved for R50,000 gross a month — from May 12 last year — as deputy campaign manager.
Bishop identified two categories of payments made by the DA:
- The first related to payments for specific party work, including campaign management and policy responsibilities. Bishop wrote that these payments “fit most naturally” within the constitutional prohibition on outside paid work.
- The second category related to “top-up” or “equalisation” payments linked to a member’s role. Bishop wrote that “on a broad reading of the relevant provisions, they too would be prohibited”.
The George report states that former DA leader and agriculture minister John Steenhuisen received monthly top-ups dating back to at least June 2021. The payments increased over time, reaching R58,344 gross a month between April and June 2024. The report states that the amount was intended to equalise his salary with that of a provincial premier.
After Steenhuisen joined the cabinet, the payment was reduced to R39,560 gross a month. The report states this was intended to equalise his total remuneration with that of the deputy president.
The report also states that:
- Steenhuisen’s appointment of Greg Mills as adviser to the federal leader was “not formally approved on the party organogram” and that the DA funded some of Mills’s travel and accommodation costs.
- DA MP and head of policy Mathew Cuthbert received R50,000 gross a month from April 1 last year for a position previously occupied by a salaried party employee, according to the report.
- Former Tshwane mayor Cilliers Brink received R62,386 gross a month after the party requested that he remain in the Tshwane council rather than return to parliament before the 2026 elections.
- Chief whip George Michalakis received R9,053 gross a month to compensate for the difference between his parliamentary salary and what he would have earned as chief whip of the opposition had the DA not entered the government of national unity.
- uMngeni mayor Christopher Pappas received R44,609 gross a month from October last year after the federal finance committee approved the payment on appeal.
The executive ethics code prohibits members of the executive from receiving “remuneration for any work or service” outside their official duties.
Another clause requires members of the executive to confirm in writing that they receive “no remuneration” other than their official salary.
Ultimately my view is that a court will conclude that the payments are permissible. But I cannot express that view with any great confidence.”
— Advocate Michael Bishop
Bishop wrote that he had not been informed whether members receiving the payments had declared them in parliament’s register of financial interests.
Parliamentary rules require MPs receiving remuneration for outside work to obtain permission from their chief whip and disclose the payments.
Bishop proposed three options to the DA:
- terminate the payments;
- continue them and accept the legal risk; or
- seek a formal ruling from the president, parliamentary authorities or the public protector.
“Ultimately my view is that a court will conclude that the payments are permissible,” Bishop wrote. “But I cannot express that view with any great confidence.”
George resigned from the DA and parliament on January 15 this year following a dispute with Steenhuisen. He stated that a DA-issued credit card used by Steenhuisen was cancelled in March last year after “payments could not be reconciled and purchases for which the card was not intended were made”.
A DA internal investigation later found that the expenditure had been reconciled and that there was no prima facie evidence of misappropriation. The Sunday Times subsequently reported that no formal audit of the card had been conducted after George raised concerns.
Steenhuisen and Sarupen, now the federal council chair, did not respond to questions.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.