The board members of South Africa’s national oil company PetroSA should lead by example and resign, the Portfolio Committee on Energy has suggested.

The committee, which met with representatives of the Department of Energy (DoE) and the Central Energy Fund (CEF) at PetroSA’s head office in Parow, in the Western Cape, on Wednesday, said the oil company was on the verge of collapse and that it was incorrect for top executives of the company to be suspended, without the board taking responsibility.

“The PetroSA board is not immune to the problems which beset the company,” committee chairperson Fikile Majola said.

The committee questioned the current status relating to the suspension of PetroSA CEO Nosizwe Nokwe-Macamo and two other senior executives by the State-owned oil company board.

The PetroSA board, in May, asked Nokwe-Macamo, CFO Lindiwe Mthinmunye-Bakoro and acting VP of upstream operations Andrew Dippenaar to take leave while an investigation into their alleged poor performance was undertaken or face suspension.

Media reports have, however, suggested that the executives have refused to take leave.

“We register our concern regarding the suspension of the three top executives. The oil company plays a pivotal role in the energy sector of the country and the supply of petrochemical products to South African oil companies,” Majola added, highlighting that the stability and governance of the oil company was critical, considering the challenges it was facing.

The committee said it needed to engage Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson and the PetroSA board to get a comprehensive briefing about the suspensions and the investigation that would be conducted.

“As the oversight body, it is important to be briefed on the latest developments on what is happening and not to be informed through media reports,” Majola said.

The committee welcomed the turnaround strategy presented by the CEF to improve the current governance and financial situation of PetroSA and believed the company needed an overhaul, as the current situation was not convincing. “Therefore, the immediate implementation of the turnaround strategy is critical.”

The committee, however, expressed concern about the equal powers that the PetroSA and the CEF boards had in terms of managing the oil company. The committee believed that the CEF, as the holding company, should have the upper hand when it came to PetroSA as its subsidiary. The committee indicated that this needed to be corrected.

Majola said, based on the context as to what has happened and the presentation by the CEF, it was important to wait for up to six months to determine if the business would survive.