Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Defence (JSCD) was at the Department of Defence (DoD) Mobilisation Centre on Monday 15 December, following calls for an urgent update on deployment readiness ahead of an Operation Mistral rotation to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in January.
The oversight visit to the De Brug facility outside Bloemfontein was sparked during a 5 December JSCD meeting where the MONUSCO (United Nations Stabilisation Mission in the DRC) rotation was criticised by at least two committee members.
One of those was Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) parliamentarian Carl Niehaus whose criticism continued after the De Brug visit.
Calling the visit “an utter travesty”, he has it instead of transparency and constructive dialogue on the readiness of the SA National Defence Force (SANDF) it became a blatant display of arrogance, incompetence and constitutional disregard, worsened by the African National Congress (ANC)’s abuse of confidentiality rules to shield their own and hide the SANDF’s disastrous state.
Niehaus pulls no punches stating the De Brug visit “hit a new low in democratic oversight” with proceedings declared a State secret. “Nothing justified such classification – no military strategies or classified operations, just exposure of systemic SANDF failures. This secrecy gagged parliamentarians and the public keeping the rot hidden. It is not national security protection; it is a cover-up to insulate Minister Motshekga and her cadres from accountability,” he is on record as saying.
“The meeting,” he continues, “mocked parliamentary process. Taxpayers spent thousands of Rand on flights, accommodations and logistics to bring members to this headquarters, only for us to get nothing substantive. SANDF officers, meant to present on mobilisation and demobilisation, showed outright contempt. Their presentations were superficial, evasive, full of platitudes and lacking meaningful data on equipment shortages, personnel readiness or broader challenges. They clearly intended no real sharing of information—a deliberate affront to Parliament’s oversight role and the constitutional separation of powers requiring the executive and military to answer to the legislature”.
Going further he takes exception to the “behaviour” of Defence and Military Veterans Minister Angie Motshekga.
“She was expected to attend fully, lead and ensure compliance with inquiries. Instead, she put in a cameo performance of less than two hours and then vanished on the back of a flimsy excuse. In that short time, she echoed the officers’ deflections, bolstering their arrogant, egocentric stance instead of holding them accountable. This was complicity in unconstitutional conduct.
“Motshekga strengthened SANDF elements that disdain democratic institutions. As a seasoned politician, she should know better than to enable such behaviour. Her department’s failures—from delayed peacekeeping deployments to poor veteran support—need urgent action, not cover-ups. Her brief presence reflected the ANC ethos: protect your own, regardless of cost to national security and public funds.”
Pointing to what he termed “the farcical secrecy imposition” Niehaus refrains from details of discussions stating “they exposed a defence force in disarray: underfunded, undermanned and ill-equipped for basic operations”.
Niehaus and his National Council of Provinces (NCOP) colleague Virgill Gericke “refused complicity” walking out in “principled protest against eroding parliamentary authority”.
Reporting on Monday’s oversight visit, SANDF Directorate Corporate Communication (DCC) Director, Rear Admiral (JG) Prince Tshabalala, has it it was part of “Parliament’s responsibility to exercise oversight over the defence portfolio and to engage directly with the SANDF on matters relating to its mandate, operational readiness and missions”.
A closed meeting saw committee members meet, among others, Joint Operations Division Chief, Lieutenant General Siphiwe Sangweni, in “a cordial and constructive atmosphere”. The engagement, Tshabalala reported, “reaffirmed the value of open dialogue and continuous interaction in addressing challenges, priorities and operational realities facing the SANDF”.
Also on the programme for the De Brug day were briefings, engagements with personnel and a walkabout of the facility.
“Overall, the visit underscored the importance of sustained parliamentary oversight in promoting accountability, transparency and the effective functioning of the DoD in service of South Africa.”
Aviation and defence analyst Dean Wingrin said the recent interactions between the JSCD and SANDF has revealed “a serious breakdown in trust between the two parties,” which has serious implications for the civil-military relationship in South Africa and is a very worrying trend.”
Wingrin explained that on 15 December, JSCD members were to interact with soldiers in final preparations for deployment to the DRC with the United Nations, only to be told that morning that the soldiers had already left for the DRC on 7 and 13 December. These dates were not disclosed when planning the visit.
“Apparently, Sangweni did not respond directly to members’ questions, referencing documents such as a MoU and the Status of Unit Requirements while refusing to provide it to the Committee or being unable to explain it. I believe that the members were quite vocal about the ‘disdain’ shown by the SANDF to Parliament, the Minister shielding her Generals who were equally vocal to the Members,” Wingrin stated.
The fact that some JSCD members walked out in frustration, “reflects a profound breakdown in trust and a growing resistance to the expectation that Parliament will continue to rubber-stamp foreign deployments without credible oversight,” Wingrin concluded.
He quoted a JSCD Members saying, “SANDF disdain for oversight shows a military culture detached from democratic norms. Officers, protected politically, act with impunity, forgetting they serve the Constitution, not a party.”
