We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned about the recent developments surrounding the hiring process for the leadership vacancy at the National Library of South Africa (NLSA). The re-advertisement of this crucial position, with the omission of the title "National Librarian" and the dilution of Library and Information Science (LIS) qualifications from a requirement to a preference, raises serious questions about the integrity of the process and the future of this vital institution. We note that Section 9 of the National Library of South Africa Act (Act 92 of 1998) specifies that the Board must appoint a chief executive officer, who is also known as the National Librarian, and is responsible for the management of the affairs of the National Library.

Statement of Concerns:

1. Dilution of LIS Expertise: The NLSA has re-advertised the leadership position, diminishing the importance of Library and Information Science (LIS) qualifications. This undermines the professional standards of the LIS sector and jeopardizes the NLSA's ability to effectively fulfill its mandate as outlined in Section 3 of the National Library of South Africa Act, which includes contributing to socio-economic, cultural, educational, scientific and innovative development by collecting, recording, preserving and making available the national documentary heritage, and promoting an awareness and appreciation thereof, by fostering information literacy, and by facilitating access to the world's information resources.
2. Lack of Transparency Regarding the NLSA Board: A lack of transparency surrounds the identity, qualifications, and professional affiliations of the current NLSA Board members. This opacity is unacceptable, as the LIS community and the public have a right to know who is making critical decisions about the National Library's future. This is especially pertinent given the Board's significant responsibilities, including formulating the policies of the National Library, as outlined in Section 7 of the National Library of South Africa Act.
3. Questionable Board Qualifications: There are serious concerns regarding whether the current Board members possess the necessary knowledge and experience in the Library and Information Services (LIS) sector to effectively govern the National Library. It is unclear if Board members are registered with the recognized professional body (LIASA), hold LIS qualifications, or have a demonstrated history of contributing to the advancement of libraries and information access. This lack of clarity is troubling, especially considering that Section 6 of the National Library of South Africa Act outlines the Board's composition and emphasizes the Minister's responsibility to apply the principles of transparency and representativity when appointing members and specifies that at least one member must have financial expertise. The Act, however, does not explicitly detail that LIS expertise is a prerequisite for all board members.
4. Potential Conflict of Interest: The current situation raises doubts about whether the Board is acting in the best interest of the LIS profession and the South African public, or if other interests are being prioritized. The Act emphasizes the Board's responsibility to act in the interest of the National Library in Section 7.
5. Interviewing Non-Librarian: We are also aware that you have shortlisted and interviewed the non-librarians for this crucial post yesterday. Your interviews compromise the future of our profession, and those interviews must be halted.

Demands:

In the interest of transparency and accountability, we demand the following:

1. Public Disclosure of Board Information: The immediate public release of the names, qualifications, and professional backgrounds of all current NLSA Board members. This is in line with the principle of transparency as outlined in Section 6 of the National Library of South Africa Act.
2. Commitment to LIS Standards: A firm commitment that the future leadership of the NLSA, specifically the National Librarian/CEO, will be selected based on professional LIS standards and will not be subject to undue influence or political expediency. This aligns with the need for the CEO to be responsible for the management of the affairs of the National Library as per Section 9 of the Act.
3. A complete stop to the appointment of the National Librarian who is not a librarian: We therefore instruct the board to stop the appointment of a non-librarian on the position of the national librarian with immediate effect.