Cabinet Decisions are Collective — Attorney General

Attorney- General Virginia Mabiza has stressed that Cabinet operates under the doctrine of collective responsibility, warning that ministers and Vice Presidents must publicly support Government decisions or step down.

In a statement over the weekend, Mabiza said the Constitution clearly outlines how members of the Executive should conduct themselves, emphasising both individual and collective accountability.

“The law is very clear in terms of how Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and Cabinet should conduct themselves. Sections 106 and 107 of the Constitution provide for this. Cabinet members are accountable collectively and individually to the President for the performance of their functions,” she said.

She explained that this framework creates overlapping responsibilities within Government.

“This creates two different but overlapping types of responsibility, namely: individual accountability, where each Cabinet minister is personally responsible to the President for their own ministry’s performance, including how they run their portfolio, implement policy, and execute lawful instructions from the President,” Mabiza said.

“The conduct entails acting within the law, the Constitution, and Cabinet procedures.”

Mabiza said the President retains full authority over members of Cabinet, including the power to discipline or remove them without affecting the entire Executive structure.

“The President can reprimand, reassign, demote, or dismiss an individual minister or even a Vice President without bringing down the whole Cabinet. The President has authority over each minister’s continued appointment. Section 104 of the Constitution vests executive authority in the President, and ministers hold office at his pleasure,” she said.

She stressed that despite this individual accountability, Cabinet functions as a united body bound by shared decisions.

“All Cabinet members are bound together and share responsibility for Government policy and decisions. Once Cabinet adopts a policy, every Cabinet member must publicly support and defend it, even if they privately disagree. This is more or less Cabinet solidarity, literally speaking,” Mabiza said.

“In other words, this is collective responsibility of Cabinet. If there’s systemic failure, the whole Cabinet is politically or legally answerable to the President.”

Mabiza also highlighted the importance of confidentiality in Cabinet operations, cautioning against leaks or public dissent.

“Confidentiality ought to be observed in terms of Cabinet rules. Discussions stay in Cabinet. A member is not allowed to leak or distance themselves later,” she said.

“The legal effect of this is that no minister can publicly contradict official Government policy. If a minister can’t support a Cabinet decision, the obvious option is to RESIGN.”

She cited a precedent from the First Republic, where former Industry Minister Nkosana Moyo stepped down after concluding he was not well suited to serve in Cabinet, demonstrating that resignation is permissible under the law.

Mabiza reiterated that ministers serve at the President’s pleasure and can be removed at any time.

“The President can also remove any member of Cabinet, as they all serve at his pleasure. Ministers are accountable individually to the President for the administration of their ministries. The President appoints and may remove ministers at his discretion — Section 104(2),” she said.

“In other words, each minister, Deputy Minister, or Vice President can be fired on their own for messing up their job. But they also can’t throw Cabinet under the bus, as they’re tied to joint decisions and must defend them.”

She added that efforts are underway to further strengthen governance standards through legislation.

“Section 106(3) of the Constitution provides for a code of conduct to regulate Vice Presidents, Ministers, and Deputy Ministers. The Bill to align with the Constitution on this aspect is a work in progress,” Mabiza said.