TLC using court to silence public criticism – Ex-employee

A former The Luke Commission (TLC) employee has accused the organisation of attempting to use the High Court to silence public criticism over alleged labour and financial management concerns.

The former employee argued that the blanket gag order the TLC was seeking would unlawfully curtail the respondents’ freedom of expression.

Nkosinathi Makhava Nhlabatsi is opposing an urgent application brought by the TLC and has asked the High Court to dismiss the case.

He accuses the organisation of trying to prevent him and two other respondents from discussing alleged unfair labour practices and other matters he says are in the public interest.

Nhlabatsi is the first respondent in the matter alongside second respondent Ntokozo Michael Mabundza and third respondent Sydney Maseko.

In his answering affidavit, Nhlabatsi argues that TLC’s application goes beyond seeking protection from specific defamatory statements and instead seeks a broad order that would prevent the respondents from making future comments involving the organisation, even where such comments are truthful.

He further alleged that the proposed order would extend to private WhatsApp conversations and would compel the respondents to remove social media posts without the court first determining whether the publications were defamatory.

Nhlabatsi described this as an attempt to micromanage and control the right to freedom of speech, arguing that such an order would violate their constitutional rights.

The former employee has also challenged the urgency of the application, claiming that the Luke Commission was aware of the allegations as early as May but only approached the court after a significant delay.

He claimed that the third respondent, Maseko, privately contacted Luke VanderWal through Facebook Messenger on May 27 but received no response. Maseko allegedly raised most of the issues publicly two days later on May 29, tagging VanderWal and the deponent to the founding affidavit, Echo Nomsa VanderWal.

According to Nhlabatsi, the two allegedly untagged themselves, demonstrating that they had seen the posts. He further claimed that Luke VanderWal subsequently published a post that indirectly responded to the allegations. Nhlabatsi argues that this sequence of events demonstrated that the organisation was aware of the allegations well before it launched the court proceedings.

He also alleged that the organisation served him with a cease-and-desist letter dated May 25 only on July 6 while the parties were at TLC premises with officials from the office of the labour commissioner.

He argued that TLC’s failure to specify the dates of the allegedly defamatory social media posts was deliberate because doing so would expose the lack of urgency in the application.

The former employee insisted that the respondents’ publications were not defamatory but constituted truthful and fair comment on matters of public interest.

He claimed the issues raised have since attracted the attention of the Ministry of Labour, Members of Parliament and labour inspectors who allegedly visited TLC.

“We are waiting for a report from the office of the labour commissioner. Therefore, it will be premature to ask us to retract these publications before the report from the labour commissioner is made public,” Nhlabatsi stated.

Nhlabatsi further alleged that employee deductions for provident fund contributions were not remitted to the relevant fund. He claimed that his own last ENPF contribution was made in October 2025 despite deductions allegedly continuing to be made from his salary.

The former employee also alleged that the organisation had experienced recurring financial problems since 2023, citing retrenchments, delayed salaries and alleged failure to remit employee contributions.

Nhlabatsi also referred to a July 1 job advertisement allegedly posted on the ShareWithUs Facebook page, claiming that it attracted numerous negative comments from members of the public. He argued that the reaction to the job advert supports his contention that the concerns raised by the respondents were not isolated allegations.

He further referred to concerns allegedly raised by former Health Minister Lizzie Nkosi in 2025 and comments attributed to the then Minister of Health regarding the organisation’s operations.

‘ECHO VANDERWAL HAS NO AUTHORITY TO SIGN’

The former employee of TLC, Nkosinathi Nhlabatsi, argued that social media has become a modern platform through which the customary practice can be exercised and the organisation cannot use the courts to prevent them from raising awareness.

Nhlabatsi also challenged the authority of Echo VanderWal to institute the proceedings, claiming that the board resolution attached to the founding affidavit authorised Dr Harry VanderWal to sign documents relating to the case but did not authorise Echo VanderWal to act in his place.

He has also questioned whether the founding affidavit was properly commissioned, arguing that the Commissioner of Oaths failed to provide adequate details regarding his or her identity and place of work.

The former employee further disputes the Luke Commission’s description of his employment, saying he was employed as an eye clinic technician before being moved to supply chain and logistics and later briefly performing duties as a care junior manager.

He claimed that his contract was abruptly terminated on February 2 rather than February 20 as allegedly stated by the applicant.

He argued that granting the interdict would amount to a lifetime gag order and would prevent the respondents from commenting on future developments.

The allegations contained in the answering affidavit are yet to be tested in court.