Focus on two new legislative bills by ActionSA, a political party in South Africa. This is a governance policy reform case, which looks at how legislative initiatives engage in political petition to ensure parliamentary oversight and enhance participatory democracy.
Problems and Purpose
In July 2025, ActionSA which is a political party in South Africa founded by Herman Mashaba issued its notice to introduce two new bills called the Constitution Twenty-Second Amendment Bill and the Cut Cabinet Perks Bill, where issues regarding a wasteful government were being addressed to ensure that the ministers were appointed on metrics (ActionSA, 2025). The two main problems that were highlighted during the campaign of this bill were, firstly, that the campaign believes that South Africa have what they call a ‘bloated cabinet’, arguing that South Africa has one of the largest cabinets in the world and that the cabinet needs to cut the deputy ministers positions to enhance accountability oversight. Under the administration of the South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, the national executive included more than 70 ministers and deputy ministers, leading to public frustration over perceived government waste and patronage politics (Booysen, 2011; Southall, 2016). Secondly, the perks and benefits that the cabinet gets is wasteful which according to the bill needed to be changed and controlled, and that is why ActionSA wants to end the president’s unilateral power over the Ministerial Handbook which has all information regarding the minsters spendings. Such issues are highly sensitive in a country with high corruption, low economic development and importantly where citizens’ trust in political institutions steadily declines.
The Campaign is driven by frustration among South Africans to hold the government accountable and enhance oversight, which illustrates participatory democracy by involving public comments and using a public petition to deepen democratic practices in South Africa. ActionSA, demanding accountability shows that this case is not only important as a platform to influence government policies and decision making, but also the purpose of the campaign was to create a platform where citizens can demonstrate their dissatisfaction with the governance structure and empower citizens to participate directly in shaping governance. Initiatives such as ActionSA are important because they highlight the importance of citizens practicing democracy beyond elections. This case is notable because it shows how petitions can hold leaders accountable for how resources are used. The leadership of ActionSA created a sense of pressure on the government, providing insight into how participatory tools like the petition can possibly bridge the gap between citizens and government. Overall, ActionSA works as part of a broader package of reforms to strengthen South Africa’s democracy by tackling corruption, reducing wasteful expenditure, and ensuring that executive power is more closely analysed with the help of civil society. This campaign is therefore best described as an institutional accountability reform with a participatory dimension through the petition.
Background History and Context
Since the dawn of democracy in 1994, South Africa has been one the countries with the biggest cabinet in terms of members (People’s Assembly, 2019). Section 91 of the Constitution of 1996 expresses the role of the cabinet which consists of the President, Deputy President, Ministers and Deputy Ministers; it states that the cabinet's role is to develop, implement and coordinate the national legislations or policies put in place. Over time, the cabinet has grown significantly resulting in what critics explain as a bloated cabinet, from 62 members in 2019 to 75 members in 2024, this growth is driven by the need for growth of different political interests which is appointed by the President of South Africa and there is no fixed number in the constitution of what the size of the cabinet should be but it is guided by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) in Section 91. Shomolekae (2025) explains that the cabinet consists of 32 ministers and 43 deputy ministers. Lodge (2003) also highlights how the size and structure of the executive in South Africa became central post-apartheid where Cabinet positions serve as instruments of patronage. Along with the growth of the ministerial handbook, also known as the Executive Members Guide which sets out the perks, salaries, allowances etc of the cabinet. The president has power to amend the handbook unilaterally which then becomes controversial in South Africa because of the issues of corruption, poor service delivery and weak accountability.
In response to the concerns of a bloated cabinet, the political party called ActionSA positioned itself as an advocate for governance oversight by introducing the Cut the Cabinet Perks Bill and the Constitution Twenty-Second Amendment Bill, which promoted the reducing of the cabinet size and the enhancing of oversight. This campaign can be understood as an act to restore the moral leadership on which democracy was founded, and to respond to the frustrations of South African citizens followed by a series of governance failures. An example of one of the failures that led to this frustration is “the latest issue of the President’s decision to place the Minister of Police Senzo Mchunu on special leave amid allegations of the interference on police investigations and ties to criminal elements made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant, where a non-minister was appointed as Acting minister of Police” (Shomolekae, 2025). Therefore, the campaign used public petition to advocate for constitutional reform to hold the cabinet accountable for how and where money is spent. The growth of the cabinet is closely tied with the issues South Africa is facing, such as economic challenges and corruption scandals because oversight is not easy when the cabinet is large. This enhances easy practices of corruption thus hindering economic development in South Africa. These issues created a space for the Cut the Cabinet Campaign to promote debates about the rightful cabinet size and cabinet spending as symbolic border concerns about governance.
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
The campaign was organised by the ActionSA political party, where they drafted and introduced the Cut Cabinet Perks Bill and a Constitutional amendment to abolish the positions of deputy ministers (ActionSA, 2024). The campaign went beyond and included a mobilisation strategy of democratic participation through the creation of a petition to support the fight to cut the cabinet (ActionSA, 2024). ActionSA was the main organiser of the campaign, therefore the campaign relied heavily on the party’s internal structure, such as their youth formus, local volunteers and coordinators. However, they gained support from other political parties such as the Democratic Alliance (DA), Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and Build One SA. These parties have publicly announced their support towards the criticisms of the bloated cabinet lending legitimacy to the ActionSA proposal. A major supporting entity in this campaign is media coverage where outlets like News24, Daily Maverick and PoliticWeb used their platform to amplify the campaign and spread the word of introducing this bill. Funding plated a crucial role in ensuring that the campaign was a success and for visibility. Since ActionSA is the main organisers, the funding came from the political party’s own internal finances, donors and some of the funds were declared under the Political Party Funding Act. According to the IEC’s Political Party Funding Reports (2023–2024) ActionSA has received private donations from individuals, companies, and its leader Herman Mashaba who has personally bankrolled much of the party’s activity since its founding. The funds allowed the campaign to reach a large and diverse audience across the provinces by allowing ActionSA to invest in the production of the campaign such as advertising the signing of the petition by enabling campaign materials such as the posters, infographics and banners. Fung (2006) and Cornwall (2008) provide us with more insight into understanding that meaningful participation requires resources and supportive structures to reduce barriers to engagement. Therefore financial resources strengthened the petition by promoting the strong media presences that this campaign created which was needed to ensure a high number of people signed the petition. Possibly, without the necessary financial support, the petition would have not reached a large, diverse community and most people would have not even known about the petition.
Participant Recruitment and Selection
The Cut the Cabinet Bill was open to the public where ActionSA made sure to advertise the petition and not restrict it to selected groups, but instead all South African Citizens were open and encouraged to participate by signing the petition online through the ActionSA website and engaging on social media. This allowed all South African citizens to participate because this campaign was inclusive and aimed to enhance participatory democracy. Based on social media there is an indication of high engagement, even though the number of the people who signed the petition has not been released by ActionSA but there is a sense of high engagement on social platforms.
Methods and Tools Used
The cornerstone of the campaign was the use of public petitions which allowed citizens to support the cutting of the cabinet by acting as a tool of both digital mobilisation and a participatory mechanism. Smith (2009) states that petition is one of the most accessible and low-cost forms of citizen participation, enabling large numbers of people to signal collective demands. ActionSA created an online petition platform on the ActionSA official website allowing citizens to sign and share the link on different platforms. The use of the petition created public awareness through the use of community meetings by using volunteers to mobilise the purpose of the bill and collect signatures for the petition. Fung (2006) states that such participatory mechanisms are vital because they create opportunities for citizens to influence decision making processes that are otherwise dominated by elites. Overall, the key method used was petition. Although a single signature does not compel government action, many signatures strengthen the voice of the campaign and provide tangible evidence to raise this demand as a citizen demand. This is one method of practicing democracy beyond elections. In this way the petition was used by ActionSA as a democratic tool.
Another method used was public mobilisation through public advocacy, the campaign created public awareness by also involving in- person engagement through community outreach to reach the adultery audience that are not active on digital platforms. The volunteers and provincial leaders of ActionSA local branches organised community meetings and information drives where the issues were being explained to educate those who did not understand the benefits of the campaign and to get more people engaged. This was a major tool to get through to the people who do not to have access to the internet, so that they are not only informed about the issue but also engage in signing the petition during those meetings. Media engagement also played a big part in encouraging people to sign the petition through the use of press conferences, radio talks and interviews to increase awareness. As well as digital platforms as a tool through social media, releasing Facebook, Twitter posts and YouTube videos with the use of hashtags such as #CutTheCabinet and #EndWastefulSpending. Digital platforms were also used as a tool to increase accessibility and ensure that the petition went beyond geographical boundaries and reach a larger number of citizens.
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
Phase 1: The campaign began with the drafting of the two bills on the 25th of July 2025, the bills outlined the key reforms of the campaign and the benefits of the bill. The leader of ActionSA identified that there was an issue with the government being wasteful and having what he referred to as a bloated cabinet. (ActionSA, 2024). This then led to the proposal of two legislative bills, firstly the Cut the Cabinet Perks Bill which aimed to address the issue of a bloated government. Compared to other developed countries like Japan and USA with a high number of population and high percentage of GDP and low cabinet size, South Africa has a larger cabinet while having less population and GDP then Japan and USA, for example Japan has $4,21 trillion GDP, 122 million population and only a cabinet size of 20, yet South Africa, with only $380 billon GDP and 62 million population has a cabinet size of 30 (Frase, 2024). Therefore, this resulted in the campaign concern of a bloated government. The campaign’s main argument was that we do not need 74 ministers and deputy ministers, instead, the bill proposed the elimination of the 43 positions of the deputy ministers saying this would save the South African taxpayers at least 1,5 billion annually and put money where it matters. Thereafter, ActionSA drafted the second bill called the Constitution Twenty-Second Amendment Bill, the two bills would enable a right-size government making parliamentary oversight and transparency easier and importantly help to reinvest money in priorities that matter like creating jobs and building schools.
Phase 2: ActionSA then launched an online and physical petition to get people to agree with the bill as a form of citizen participation. The leaders of ActionSA and its local volunteers went to public spaces to collect signatures for the petition. For example, in KZN the local volunteers of ActionSA branch hosted a community informative session to advocate for the signing of the petition. Fung (2006) highlights how participatory mechanisms like petitions and public campaigns enhance empowered participation by creating spaces where citizens can collectively shape the agenda. For the online petition, ActionSA involved media and public advocacy where they announced the benefits of the bill to highlight the importance of signing the bill, announcing the benefits and specifically the figures to be saved was also used to strengthen the argument. People were encouraged to engage by sharing links and tag MPs to create pressure on Parliament.
Phase 3: The final process was the submitting of the bill to parliament. After the support was gained from the petition the bill was submitted in May 2025 where ActionSA officially submitted the bill in parliament as the Party's broader cabinet reform package. This transformed the public petition into a legislative proposal to influence decision making in formal governance structure. Then after, in July the bill was submitted before the portfolio committee of Justice and Constitution Development. Shomolekae (2025) mentioned that ActionSA went beyond, and during a press conference ActionSA directly submitted the bill to the President for his consideration and whether the ANC and GNU would support the bill. ActionSA states that the proposals of the bills were made to reduce wasteful government spending, ensure that ministers are appointed based on merit and their commitment to public service. According to Gaventa (2004) this has created what is known as invited spaces of participation where citizen inputs become part of recognised governance processes.
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
ActionSA through the campaign and the use of the petition has enhanced participatory democracy in South Africa, resulting in a significant influence on South Africa’s broader political discourse. The campaign did not only aim to challenge those in power, but created invited spaces through citizen-led advocacy, resulting in a high-quality democratic influence over the government. Fung and Wight (2003) highlight the idea of empowered participatory governance where citizens actively shape decision making processes through structured engagement. Therefore, ActionSA had a significant influence around the practice of accountability and participatory governance. The proposal of the bill challenged and reframed the discussions on state expenditure by showing people that the issues of the ministerial perks are indeed a concern. For example, ActionSA states that R1.5 billion could be saved per year from these perks where this money could be used to fix important issues that South Africa is currently facing such as unemployment, the lack of service delivery and poor infrastructures. The reforms of the campaign are not just symbolic but practical, they aim to influence decision making in formal government structures by encouraging legislative change.
Therefore, the campaign has increased pressure for parliament to be more transparent and increase channels of accountability. The demand for oversight over the ministerial handbook will create a sense of decentralisation of power within increased oversight. This was not only a practice of horizontal accountability but has encouraged vertical accountability as well. “Vertical accountability is achieved through the direct control exercised by citizens over their representatives, primarily through elections, but also through protests, petitions, and public discourse” (Schedler, Diamond and Plattner, 1999, p.14). Gaventa calls for a move from “claimed” to “invited” spaces of participation which he explains as where citizen demands influence institutional outcomes. Through the use of petition, the campaign has encouraged ordinary citizens to participate in holding the cabinet accountable, showing that the space was open for all people to exercise their voice in political discussions. For example, the volunteers of ActionSA went into local committees to influence engagement. Even though there have not been any statistics in terms of how many people signed the petition, the campaign sparked public debates by attracting widespread discussions on social media platforms, radio and within communities. This encouraged citizens to reflect on political agendas by reframing the issue that the campaign highlights as a policy debate. Therefore, the campaign was not only influential as a governance policy reform campaign but also created a space of civic dialogue on how participation can be used to shape governance beyond elections.
Even though the bill has been submitted, there has been slow legislative action. There has not been any confirmation or guarantee that this legislation will be passed. President Ramaphosa and other government officials like the GNU have publicly defended the roles of deputy ministers arguing that the role that the deputy ministers play is essential as a support to the cabinet members (Trollip, 2025). The institution of Race Relations supported the president and said that the cutting of the cabinet will not solve deeper economic issues in South Africa, instead better policies are needed. This shows that the bill could be rejected because there seems to be structural resistance towards reforms of the submitted bills. The campaign has received criticisms for being viewed as politicised, where they believe that this campaign could be a political point scoring move for the ActionSA political party and not necessarily for legislative reform. For example, in the earlier stages of the campaign the DA had accused ActionSA of copying the idea of the campaign from them, creating a question about whether this campaign is purely for policy reform or political populist for electoral benefits. Concerns were raised about the efficiency of cutting the cabinet, some of them argue that this might lead to a weakening of service delivery and this might put more pressure on the ministers. Therefore, the effectiveness and administration process of cutting the cabinet is not proven to be as effective in some departments.
The petition over cutting the cabinet demonstrates that participatory democracy actually leads to accountability. The campaign shows the importance of transparency to ensure accountability is practiced which enhances transparency for future governments when citizens understand its importance. There was no sense of effective responsiveness from this case, but it resulted in a great practice of democratic participation where the petition and public advocacy fed into the formal legislative process encouraging more people to engage in such campaigns. Overall, ActionSA created a civic platform for people to exercise their voices and symbolically demand reform towards South Africa’s government structure.
Analysis and Lessons Learned
This campaign helps us understand the different lenses and why actors like political parties, civil society and citizens seek institutional reform. It also helps us understand how reforms affect democratic quality, and what constitutes meaningful participation in contexts like South Africa. While ActionSA as a political party might benefit from the visibility of the campaign, the process of participation itself went beyond the party politics and created invited spaces to the public for policy dialogue, this shows how the campaign acted as a practice of enhancing democracy rather than just being a point scoring opportunity for elections as the campaign doesn’t advertise they party during the campaign in anyway or even mention how they party is better but rather merely focuses on the issues citizens face and the principles that the campaign embodied such as participatory democracy and accountability. This case provides insight into how petitions can serve as a rich participatory democracy practice tool in South Africa. Fung (2006) states how participatory tools like petition work best when they connect citizens input to decision making structures. This perfectly explains how the signing of the signatures lead to a formal legislative proposal. The key lesson this case highlights is that when mechanisms of participation are accessible, such as the petition, a sense of collective advocacy can be a powerful tool for participatory democracy, thus providing a lens into the importance of citizen engagement. Gaventa and Barrett (2010) consider accountability to be a broader concept that goes beyond formal institutions and includes the participation of citizens. Even though this is an on-going campaign and the results have not yet resulted in a reformed legislative policy but the engagement through the petition shows how democratic participation functions best when citizens are actively involved and included in decision making processes. This highlights the importance of understanding that by participating in political advocacy, we can actively bridge the gap between the promises and practice of those in power.
See Also
South Africa’s massive Cabinet compared to the USA, UK and more – BusinessTech
References
ActionSA. (2025) ActionSA Submits Cut the Cabinet Perks Bill and Constitution 22nd Amendment Bill to Parliament. [online] Available at:https://www.actionsa.org.za/cut-the-cabinet/
Arnstein, S.R., 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), pp.216-224.
Booysen, S., 2011. The African National Congress and the regeneration of political power. Wits University Press.
Cornwall, A. (2008) Unpacking Participation: Models, Meaning and Practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269-283
Frase, L. (2024) South Africa’s massive Cabinet compared to the USA, UK and more. bussinesstech, June. [online] Available at: https://businesstech.co.za/news/government/778823/south-africas-massive-cabinet-compared-to-the-usa-uk-and-more/
Fung, A. and Wright, E.O., 2003. Deepening democracy.
Fung, A., 2006. Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public administration review, 66, pp.66-75.
Gaventa, J. and Barrett, G., 2010. So what difference does it make? Mapping the outcomes of citizen engagement. IDS Working Papers, 2010(347), pp.01-72.
Gaventa, J., 2004. Towards participatory governance: assessing the transformative possibilities. Participation: From tyranny to transformation, pp.25-41.
Independent Electoral Commission. (2024) Political Party Funding Report 2023–2024. Pretoria: Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC).
Lodge, T., 2003. Politics in South Africa: From Mandela to Mbeki. Indiana University Press.
People’s Assembly. (2019) South African Cabinet: The Week in Parliament , 31 May 2019. Available at:
Polity. (2025) Article on ActionSA’s Cut the Cabinet Campaign. Polity.org.za, July. [online] Available at:https://www.polity.org.za/article/actionsa-moves-to-amend-constitution-to-reduce-cabinet-size-2025-07-28
Republic of South Africa. (1996) Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Schedler, A., Diamond, L.J. and Plattner, M.F. eds., 1999. The self-restraining state: power and accountability in new democracies. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Smith, G., 2009. Democratic innovations: Designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge University Press.
Southall, R., 2016. The new black middle class in South Africa. Boydell & Brewer.
Trollip, A. (2025) Press statement on the Cut the Cabinet Campaign. ActionSA, September. [online] Available at:https://www.actionsa.org.za/actionsa-submits-constitutional-amendment-bill-to-the-president-at-his-request/
External Links
ActionSA introduces the Cut Cabinet Perks Bill to curb government waste - First Take SA - Omny.fm
'While others talk, we take action': ActionSA revives DA's Cut Cabinet Perks Bill
