Defence and Military Veterans Minister Angie Motshekga informed two Parliamentarians – neither from parties in the Government of National Unity (GNU) – she did not “chastise or reprimand” her SA Navy (SAN) Chief for criticising National Treasury and accusing it of “sabotaging” the SA National Defence Force (SANDF).
Vice Admiral Monde Lobese used the platform provided by SAN gala events in November to take issue with the lack of funding for the South African military, criticising “the unpatriotic and what appears to be a sell-out posture of defunding the SAN and SANDF”. His remarks were widely reported with a Department of Defence (DoD) statement noting the senior South African sailor’s words will “receive attention at all levels, starting from within the department [DoD] to Parliament”.
In July, addressing the Joint Standing Committee on Defence (JSCD), Lobese accused the National Treasury of “sabotaging” the SANDF where he put it Treasury’s refusal to release sufficient funds left key naval assets unusable and stockpiles critically under-resourced. “National Treasury…is suffocating the SANDF,” Lobese was reported as saying.
Motshekga was on the receiving end of written Parliamentary questions asked by Carl Niehaus (Economic Freedom Fighters – EFF) and Visvin Reddy (uMkhonto we Sizwe Party – MKP).
Her response to Reddy reads, in part: “I did not chastise or reprimand the Chief of the SA Navy for raising operational, logistical, or capacity challenges. Senior officers of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) are required, in terms of the Defence Act, 2002, and the Military Discipline Code, to raise such matters through established internal command and reporting channels.”
She continues: “My communication on the matter served only to clarify this requirement and to ensure that sensitive operational information is handled responsibly, without compromising national security, defence readiness, or the integrity of ongoing processes within the Department of Defence.”
“The concerns raised by the Chief of the Navy have been formally captured within the SANDF’s command structures and are receiving attention through the appropriate governance and oversight mechanisms,” Motshekga added.
In similar vein, responding to a Niehaus claim that Motshekga labelled the “admiral’s forthright critique as a mere unfortunate outburst”, the EFF public representative was informed the Ministerial leadership and actions were “fully consistent” with her oath of office. She also referenced the Defence Act and Military Discipline Code as the proper channels for raising operational, logistic and or capacity challenges and stated that at all times, her interventions have been guided by these obligations and not by personal sentiment or external pressures.
“When concerns are raised by any senior officer, including the Chief of the SA Navy, the matter must be processed through appropriate command channels, subjected to factual verification, and handled in a manner that preserves the integrity of the institution.
“The communication issued by my office regarding the Vice Admiral’s public remarks was not a reprimand for raising concerns, but rather a reminder of the established procedure for addressing internal institutional matters. The constitutional principle of transparency does not negate the requirements of operational security, military discipline, and responsible management of sensitive information within the Defence Force.
“At no stage has the Department suppressed legitimate concerns. On the contrary, the issues raised by the Chief of the Navy have been tabled, assessed within the command structure, and are currently receiving attention through the relevant governance processes of the Department and the SANDF,” her 28 November response has it.
“The position is therefore that my actions remain within the framework of constitutional obligations, statutory requirements, and the norms governing executive oversight of the Defence Force,” she informed Niehaus.
Motshekga told Reddy that she has never issued any directive, formal or informal, prohibiting the Chief of the SA Navy or any senior SANDF official from reporting safety concerns, equipment failures, resource constraints, or matters related to operational readiness.
“The Department continues to encourage accurate reporting of all operational risks…The position is simply that operational challenges must first be processed within the command structure to ensure accuracy, protect national security, and allow for coordinated institutional action.”
Reddy asked if the public disclosure of operational challenges by the SA Navy Chief was inconsistent with principles of transparency, accountability and constitutional oversight. Motshekga replied that Parliamentary oversight remains a “constitutional imperative. To this end, the Department continues to provide the Portfolio Committee and Joint Standing Committee on Defence with full and accurate briefings on the state of the SANDF, including capability gaps, resource constraints, safety risks, and readiness concerns. These updates are provided through formal submissions, presentations, and appearances before the committees, where Members have unrestricted opportunity to engage with senior officials.”
Other public comment on the Lobese remarks came from the African National Congress (ANC) in the form of Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans (PCDMV) chair Molefi “Dakota” Legoete and Democratic Alliance (DA) Member of Parliament (MP) Chris Hattingh.
Hattingh interpreted Lobese’s November words as being “perilously close to outright insubordination”. At the same time he has it “many issues referred to mirror longstanding warnings repeatedly raised by the PCDMV”.
“The DA understands Admiral Lobese’s frustration, but we cannot support the reckless manner in which he chose to express it. Senior SANDF leaders must uphold discipline and follow the correct reporting channels at all times.”
Legoete in November said while in agreement with Lobese’s sentiments on SANDF under-funding, he should not have made public the possibility of national security being compromised. “It’s very wrong because it gives credence to some international espionage and foreign intelligence agencies to understand what is happening in our country” adding Lobese should use “relevant platforms and institutions” to voice his concern.
Lobese, when wrapping up his addresses to both the SAN prestige ball and subsequent gala concert, said: “With the responsibility entrusted in me to command the seas of our country and the love I have for our motherland, I find it difficult to separate emotions from my responsibility and I am not apologetic”.
