Dear Speaker of the National Assembly, Thandi Modise

We, the undersigned, strongly believe that the shortlisting of candidates was biased, as the candidate criteria was flawed and the selection of candidates was seemingly predetermined.

The list is perplexingly dominated by politically affiliated young people and furthermore lacks demographic representation and geographical representation (all provinces), it further lacks racial balance and minority population inclusion and there are notable discrepancies in the nomination process report. This is an injustice to the sustainability of the overall National youth development agenda. We are of the observation that the selection for the NYDA Board candidates shortlist, was extremely bias, and exclusionary.

We therefore, object the shortlisting process taken for the selection of some of the candidates and call for the commencement of the interview processes be halted, pending response to the grievinences tabled herein. We further call for a process of public comments on the shortlisted candidates be initiated and availed, for young people to table their grievinences through official means.

1. The shortlist is dominated by politically affiliated young people. We are against the notion of structures such as the NYDA, serving a diverse and dynamic population of young people on a national level being subjected to exclusionary leadership by having the youth structures dominated by political affiliation and politically influenced youth leaders.

1(a) Making a selection that favors the political affiliation of a candidate more than any other criteria (eg: qualifications, activism experience, experiences in working with and engaging young people and commitment to the youth development agenda) is considered damaging to the National Youth Development discourse.

1(b). We therefore call that the shortlist be dissolved and the process be reinitiated; which creates a balance of youth representation and recognizes that there are young people working in various sectors, with diversified skills, are engaged in youth development, where they contribute tremendously to activism, socioeconomic development and youth leadership; but are not necessarily active in political groups or belong to executive positions within existing political structures.

2. Two of the shortlisted candidates are most recent NYDA Board members, where one is particularly the outgoing Board Chairperson. Both these candidates and other identified candidates, are aged 35 years of age. Furthermore, the shortlist is comprised of additional former NYDA employees, including the former National Spokesperson. We call for this to be reviewed.

2(a) It is implausible that out of 500+ CV's of outstanding youth leaders, that two of the most recent Board Members (one being the Board Chair) was reselected in the nomination process. This insinuates that there is no other applicant with credible activism and youth development experience, expertise, qualifications, impact ect, which based on the review of the applicant CV's, is not the case. Therefore this signifies the favoritism and predetermination of candidates to be shortlisted and noting that the fact that a number of the candidates have previous NYDA employment status; reemphasizes that the process was exclusionary and biased.

2(b). The NYDA Act is silent about the reappointment of Board members, we believe that there should be a subsection on this in the Act; outlining that outgoing Board members shouldn't serve consecutive terms.

2(c). A Forum comprised of former NYDA Board members and Chairpersons was established in the previous terms, aimed at ensuring continuity and preserving institutional knowledge, to allow for newly appointed Board members to be able to leverage on the institutional experience of the former members, and allow for relay of esteemed advisory and guidance from the said Forum. We strongly advise that all immediate former NYDA Board members, including the outgoing NYDA Board, should automatically be referred to joining the Forum, instead of being reappointed, especially when they are aged towards the tail end of their youth. We hereby affirm that, in order to ensure rotation of service and youth leadership opportunities, Board members should not be allowed to serve consecutive terms; however can be referred to other positions within the NYDA, in the above mentioned Forum, and other national level state entities, where deemed fit. This will also seek to address the submissions made in 2(d). We call for a discussion and a clear resolution of this particular matter.

2(d). The NYDA Act is also silent about the "age" definition as per the appointment and reappointment of Board members. We call for the inclusion of a section addressing age of candidate, whereby we submit that candidates should not be older than 35 at the time of appointment into the Board, and potential candidates, should not be aged above 35 during their service period. Although we recognize that this would question the National Youth Definition, which includes those aged 35, we would also like to submit that it be noted that those in service beyond age 35 (when appointed at the age of 35), are no longer classified as "youth". We call on a discussion and resolution on this matter.

3. There is a lack of holistic demographic representation, particularly representation of minorities and racial imbalance. We note the lack of LGBTQIA+ and Persons with Disabilities representation, amongst others, their representation not only being that they are part of minority groups but recognizing that minority groups are often excluded in such process, albeit having the equal capacities, expertise, experience, leadership acumen and capacity to fulfil the responsibilities of this nature.

3(a) We also acknowledge that only 3 of the 30 shortlisted candidates are white, Indian and coloured, respectively. Although youth population is comprised of higher  percentages; we believe that there should be a more reasonable racial balance. Young people are constantly encouraged by regional and national youth development orientated legislative instruments and actions from public officials, most notably H.E President Cyril Ramaphosa, to; take the lead in realising the constitutional dream of a united, non-sexist, non-racial, democratic, prosperous and equal society. However, this notable imbalance, seeks to mock the quest of social cohesion, equality and unity, especially amongst the youth demographic, which works tirelessly to advance the state of the development and growth of the economy.

3(b) Additionally, We note that there was no shortlisted candidate from one of the nine provinces, and that a significant majority of the shortlisted candidates are from the Gauteng region.  This is in contrast to the criteria on ensuring geographic spread, and highlights the need of the review of the selection process, halting commencement to interviews and reinitiating it; through a third party organization, as recommended below, under (8). 

4. We also note that some of the MPs did not fully participate in the shortlisting process of the candidates and the report on the shortlisting by the Subcommittee members contains missing information on Day 1.

4(a). Some of the MPs are not acknowledged in the Batches, (Examples: In Batches 1, 2 and 4, Mr Mphiti is not mentioned to have participated in the nomination process, the fact that this information is omitted is questionable; if Mr Mphiti was absent from the proceedings it should be captured, and it must be acknowledged that this has an impact on the entire nomination process. This includes Mr Bara not being mentioned in Batch 3 and Mr Khawula not being mentioned in Batch 7).

4(b). There is also an irregularity in the report for Batch 6, which states that Mr Bara nominated candidates and also states that Mr Bara did not nominate any candidates; this report therefore highlights the flaw in the entire process and does not give a true and conclusive reflection of whether Mr Bara made nominations or not.

4(c). Furthermore, the MPs who did not nominate any candidates for certain Batches such as Mr Mphiti, Mr Bara, and the Co-Chair, raises alarms; especially considering the fact that each of the 7 Batches contained young leaders with impressive CV's (with notable experience that can be deemed credible and sufficient to be one of the shortlisted into the Board), though might not be part of the youth political elite or popular amongst political affiliation centered youth circles. This (as detailed in 4 a, b, and c) emphasizes the bias in the selection process, albeit there being a said criteria for selection. 

5. We call for the criteria made and used for the selection of the candidates to be made public, in response to this submission, as well as a clear response to the submission above (4). 

6. We are seeing a repetition of selection process from the last Board shortlisting processes that took place in 2017 and we reiterate caution, particularly noting the meeting minutes report of 07 February 2017, where MP Mr Cassim expressed concern "that the impression that was being created in the Committee was that political affiliation would be rewarded instead of academic qualification. It is impossible to judge an individuals awareness of community issues based on the fact that he/she attends rallies or any form of activism. There should be diversity in the Board in terms of skills, experience and personalities. This notion that in order for one to be active he/she must be politically affiliated must be utterly rejected."

6(a) We are in steadfast support of this (6) observation and call on the Speaker of the National Assembly to issue directive on this matter, and the Chairpersons of The Joint Meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and People with Disabilities and the Select Committee on Health and Social Services to deliberate on the contents of this submission.

7. We believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it and that all young people irrespective of political affiliation and favor from political structures, should have equal opportunity to participate in the socioeconomic and political development agenda of the country. No young person should be excluded from national level youth development governance structures; due to lack of political affiliation and favoritism from politically affiliated selectors. The National Youth Policy (which is also aligned to the African Youth Charter) is one of the key legislative instruments that lead and dictate the implementation priorities for the National Youth Development Agenda, has always highlighted youth participation and youth leadership as milestones - not limited to any reservations, and thus, in order to fulfil the National Youth Development agenda, have to ensure that all young people are given equal footing and access to opportunities to partake in decision-making processes.

8. We strongly believe and submit that the selection process needs to be conducted by an independent third-party organization; which would ensure the disqualifying of noncompliant CVs and also undergo the shortlisting of the candidates (and issue reports thereof) in the presence of the Joint Subcommittee members, the Joint Subcommittee can then shortlist based on the final screened and partially shortlisted candidates from the independent third-party organization. This would ensure that  the Joint Subcommittee are not lobbied nor have any biases and undisclosed interests when undergoing the selection processes. This will also ensure that the process is made transparent, open, fair and free (as per most accurate definition). We note that although the process was deemed to be "transparent and open" (based on the modalities used to ensure this eg: publicly displaying all received qualifying CVs and televising the nomination process towards the shortlisting process), it was still largely biased and undoubtedly exclusionary. Where finally table that this be observed for inclusion in the NYDA Act. We hereby call for a discussion and resolution on this particular recommendation. 

9. The National Youth Policy, as well as other key legislative documents, including key stakeholders such as the H.E President Cyril Ramaphosa, have continuously advocated for Young South Africans to take a stand against injustice both in South Africa and around the world, and encouraged to contribute to causes that call for systemic changes. It is deplorable that a structure such as the NYDA, that serves on a National level addressing a plethora of issues affecting a diverse audience of young people, has been politicized and used for deploying politically affiliated young cadres, instead of protecting the National youth development agenda and ensuring that such as structure is one whereby all young people, can have an equal unbiased role to play in it's governance and overall sustainability. We hereby refer that this submission be acknowledged and responded to, and the calls of action as addressed above be strongly considered and taken into regard. 

9(a). Should the NYDA be a structure that is only meant to be intensively exclusionary, and intensively dominated by the youth political elite closely affiliated with or working within the most predominant political organizations; this should be stated, and also enshrined in all NYDA Board related legislative instruments (such as the NYDA Act, National Youth Policy and others), it should also be engraved in the "call for nominations" public processes so young people take not of it when engaging in the CV application process; so that the discrimination and unconstitutionality of such an act, can be clearly recognized without doubt, and be publicly condemned. 

10. Every young person should be given the opportunity to participate in the development of the country, and a dynamic and diverse group of youth leaders be appointed to serve the best interests of the NYDA with professionalism and leadership excellence at the center of it all.