Admin
17 Feb, 2026
State of the Nation Address 2026 debate by Bantu Holomisa
Speech for Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP and President of the United Democratic Movement at the State of the Nation Address 2026 debate CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY Honourable Speaker Honourable Members The Government of National Unity (GNU) will not be judged by the promises tabled during the opening of Parliament, but by whether that skeletal plan is implemented with urgency, discipline and measurable results. South Africans have heard plans before. What they demand now is execution. 1. Security is the foundation of development The State of the Nation Address (SONA) emphasised economic recovery and energy stability, but sustainable growth also depends on protecting our environment and critical infrastructure from vandalism, illegal mining and sabotage that damage ecosystems and investor confidence. We are strengthening enforcement, deploying coordinated security and accelerating prosecutions because environmental protection, stability and growth are inseparable. The GNU further recognises that development cannot flourish without security. We therefore welcome: • The deployment of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) in support of South African Police Service (SAPS) in crime epicentres such as the Cape Flats and the broader Western Cape, and areas such as Randfontein in Gauteng. • The elevation of the security cluster as a national priority. • The use of Artificial Intelligence-driven systems for predictive policing and intelligence coordination. In line with the orders issued by the Commander-in-Chief, President Ramaphosa, I confirm that the Department of Defence is seized with operational requirements to support stabilisation interventions in consultation with the security cluster. This is just phase one of restoring normality. 2. Crime and consequences: the era of impunity is over Mqwathi, mandikuqinisekise amasela ixesha lawo liphelile. Yekani ii Law Enforcement Agencies zenze umsebenzi wazo, singaphazanyiswa. The honeymoon is over. Corruption and maladministration have not merely touched the state, they have engulfed it, reaching even into our law enforcement agencies. The rot did not spare the Department of Defence either. That is why we acknowledge the President’s decision to sign the proclamation authorising the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) to investigate these matters and more. Accountability cannot be selective. It must be decisive and it must reach everywhere. At a briefing to the Portfolio Committee and Joint Standing Committee on Defence, the SIU, the Military Police, and the Hawks assured us that we have recovered over R1.6 billion linked to corruption and mismanagement within Defence. This is just a start of restoring the image of our defence force. That is consequence management in action. If Special Courts could be established by the Department of Justice in partnership with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), this will assist to accelerate the resolution of all pending military cases. Crime and corruption embarrass this country. They damage investor confidence. They weaken sovereignty. We have no choice but to confronting them head-on. 3. No country survives without law No country can function if its laws are optional, and anyone who comes to this country legally must be prepared to abide by the law or they will be shipped out. Fellow South Africans, you deserve a state that works, systems that speak to each other, and early warning mechanisms that stop crime before it spreads. Without accurate Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA) registration, South African Revenue Service (SARS) cannot collect revenue from all traders operating in our economy. Furthermore, law enforcement cannot properly trace or dismantle criminal syndicates operating in the underworld. South Africa urgently needs a coordinated security response plan with time frames and the strengthening of the NPA as to be functional. South Africa’s liberation history teaches us solidarity. But protection must be credible and enforceable. If a person is granted asylum yet voluntarily returns to the very country they claim to be fleeing during holiday season, that status must be reviewed. You cannot be in danger today and on holiday tomorrow. Accountability is not hostility. It is fairness. It is security. It is sovereignty. 4. The Public Investment Corporation Mr President, in 2023 you called on the Minister of Finance to address the pension queries of former civil servants. The affected community is still waiting for feedback and progress reports. People are dying while the system drags its feet, and each day of delay is a day of injustice. It is even more painful to see that the funds meant to secure these pensions are being looted by the elite through the Isibaya Fund at the Public Investment Corporation. Resources meant for ordinary South Africa are being diverted to enrich a few, deepening inequality and betraying public trust. How we wish that money could instead be invested in South Africa’s infrastructure, generating real returns for the country and creating jobs. This is a guaranteed investment in the nation, not in private greed. The people deserve accountability and action, not corruption. 5. Skills development: from training to productivity We welcome the review of the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) as a corrective measure to ensure that skills funding delivers measurable results. Within Defence, the South African National Service Institute (SANSI) recently passed out over 500 young people. Mr President, do consider ring-fencing and redirecting SETA funding towards: • Funding into structured, outcome-based programmes such as SANSI. • Standardised study guides in mathematics, languages, accounting and entrepreneurship. • Mandatory practical and technical skill components. In 2001, Matt Matthys, Chantal Mulder, the President South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (SAICA), Ignatius Sehoole, and I spearheaded the Thuthuka Project, providing English, Mathematics, and Accounting study guides for Grades 9 to 12. Today, that project has produced over 2,000 Black Chartered Accountants. We may need to have a tailor-made, or similar setup into skills development. 6. Prevention of Hate Crimes and Combating of Hate Speech Act The Prevention of Hate Crimes and Combating of Hate Speech Act, though intended to protect dignity and equality, goes beyond what our Constitution permits and places freedom of religion at risk. It criminalises expression using vague and undefined concepts and expands protected grounds without legal certainty. In a constitutional democracy, believers must be free to express their faith without fear of prosecution. Equality must never be advanced by eroding religious freedom. We therefore urge that the Act be constitutionally aligned through appropriate amendments before it comes into operation. 7. Conclusion: restoring dignity, restoring the state No country survives without law. No economy grows without stability. No democracy thrives without accountability. South Africans want safety, fairness, opportunity and a state that works. Through decisive, coordinated action on security reform, border integrity, infrastructure protection, skills development and consequence management, we will deliver. Judge us not by our words, but by the order we restore, the stability we secure and the future we build together. I thank you.
Admin
20 Aug, 2019
Bantu Holomisa’s address at the Colloquium on Civil Military Relations in South Africa
• Honourable Chairperson • Honourable Minister and Deputy Minister • Secretary of Defence • Fellow Committee Members and Parliamentarians • Ladies and gentlemen 1. Thank you Allow me this opportunity to thank our Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans, Mr VC Xaba, MP, for the opportunity to address you today. 2. Introduction In a time of war, the politics and society are willing to accept that the military has a just cause and its own set of values and standards, because we believe that they act for a higher good. The majority of the populace is happy to believe that the military is acting on its behalf and that it will do so with honour and justness. We have two familiar examples in our history where this is true: The South African Border War and the Armed Struggle. In both cases “the people”, or at the very least, certain sections of society, approved of, and supported and believed in, those armed actions. However, upon the dawn of true democracy, government was challenged by the necessity to make a paradigm shift, in which the South African National Defence Force simultaneously had to build an institution that is transparent, accountable and representative of the societal demographics. In addition, the former statutory and non-statutory armies had to be moulded into one united force. Both tall orders and as I discovered in my work with the Defence Force Service Commission, we, after 25 years, are still struggling to get right. As a quick example, many defence force men and women, who came from the various former armed forces retained their force numbers. There is no uniformity in the system and it has led to discrimination in promotions. We can, however, all agree that there must be a balance between having a well-funded and strong military to defend the state’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and well-being of its citizenry, and one that is subservient enough to not threaten the state and the people. But most of all, we need to guard against a military that is abused by government to quash dissent and destroy human rights and freedoms. We just have to look at our own history to understand how serious such a situation can be. 3. Parliament and laws keep us from running the risk of repeating the past The relationship between the military and civil society is sometimes a fickle one. On the continent, it has happened that the people look to the military to almost “save” them from the abuse of severe governmental corruption and looting of resources. In South Africa, there has for good reason, been a marked constitutional shift from “doing things the old way”, where military decisions were taken at security council level without consulting parliament. Which, in a certain way, meant that the military held government and the people at ransom. We can be thankful that our constitution now dictates that parliament has an imperative role to play in terms of monitoring our defence force’s readiness and sanctioning military action should the country be in imminent danger. Parliament must be kept abreast of the goings-on in the military, such as budget and operational needs, which talks to civilian oversight in its strongest and purest form. The laws governing the military and defence reviews (1998 and 2012/3) are the tools used to ensure that the civil-military relations in South Africa are healthy, trustable and that this relationship is kept stable and intact. 4. What could the business of the defence force be if we are not at war Not all threats are what we could traditionally consider the business of a defence force. The role of the defence force is not only to protect our people from outside military threats as, sometimes, the problem arises from within our borders. That is why the military should from time to time work in support of the police. Serious crime in various guises threaten the internal safety of our citizens and the security of our country. • There is a form of “economic espionage” where the intellectual property of Denel and Armscor is pillaged. • South Africans with links to foreign countries make use of our porous borders to fuel the drug trade to where it has become a pandemic. • Hijacked vehicles find their way across our borders in a matter of hours. Aside from the obvious role the defence force, for instance, plays in peacekeeping operations and emergency assist in case of natural disasters, it is clear that we need to let our minds go to see where the defence force can also play a meaningful role. 5. Secretary of Defence: is the civilian component inside the department effective? I want to zone into a very specific mechanism of civilian oversight in terms of the department of defence. As the system stands, for day-to-day administration and the coordination of strategic processes, the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans relies on the Defence Secretariat; which is the civilian component within the department. The system of having a Secretary of Defence primarily works well in developed countries, which have their own military conscription programmes, which in turn means there is a general understanding of how the military works. There is therefore a deep appreciation for the basic underpinnings of defence, which are speed, control and discipline. Even so, normally, the person who holds the post of Secretary of Defence has likely studied defence as a profession and is steeped in military culture. We need to understand that in a country where this is not the case, this leads to tensions. For instance, during my period of service on the Defence Force Service Commission, many frustrations were registered with us regarding the Secretary of Defence. On our tours across the country, interacting with the defence professionals and military careerists, the delays in decision-making and implementation was a hot topic. Commanders reported that they were constantly embarrassed when they were forced to go to the rank and file to try and explain why certain decisions were not yet implemented. This is not military culture. The Defence Force Service Commission quite often heard of scenarios where the office of the Secretary for Defence was blamed for delays. It seemed to them that the Secretary spent far too much time outside the country, for whatever reason, and was not preoccupied with making the defence force a well-oiled machine. We can all agree that the work of our defence force is by its very nature based on its ability and need to make quick decisions and ensure effective implementation. It is therefore counter-intuitive, that a civilian non-professional would be the lynchpin in this process. As currently implemented, civilian oversight has evolved into the appointment of civilians in the highest decision-making positions in a manner that undermines the ability of the security forces to manage their operations effectively. In my view, we need to take a look at the practicality of the current system of civilian oversight in the department of defence. Do we still need the Secretary of Defence to be an accounting officer? I personally favour that the commander of the defence force plays this role. Civilian oversight can reside with the office of the minister with constant liaison with parliament. Because, after all, how can the Secretary of Defence play the role of oversight and be the accounting officer? It’s just not common sense. In addition, it would be good if the defence force leadership could directly indicate their budgetary requirements to National Treasury. This will go a long way in making it an effective force that can serve this country well, and keep us safe. 6. Closing We can all agree that there is a careful, if not sometimes precarious, balance between the legislature, civil society and the military. Given our country’s history, it is all the more important that we continue to maintain this balance that we have struck over the past 25 years, but we must also be realistic about what works and what does not. It is of no use to cling to that which does not work at the expense of our country’s safety and the ability of the defence force to fulfil its constitutional mandate, in particular that “The defence force must be structured and managed as a disciplined military force”. I thank you.
Admin
18 Oct, 2013
Defence regarding SA presence in the CAR
Open letter to Chairperson of Standing Committee on Defence regarding SA presence in the CAR from Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP (UDM President) (3 April 2013) The aforementioned matter has reference. The history of what occurred since that fateful weekend in Bangui, in the Central African Republic (CAR), where 13 South African servicemen lost their lives and another 27 were injured, is well documented. We however keep hearing conflicting reports of South Africa exiting this area and that the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) has actually deployed more troops, and fighter and transport planes to the region. Allegations of Chad and France’s involvement in the military action compound matters. In addition there are still questions about who gave the rebels safe passage, and also access to the capital and South Africa’s base. Who equipped and funded their mission? The leader of the rebels, and the new CAR President, Michel Djotodia, has indicated that he will ask France and the United States to help retrain CAR’s “ill-disciplined” army that was “so easily overrun” by the rebels and they will review “resource deals”. It is reported that French troops patrol Bangui’s streets ostensibly to protect French citizens, assets and diplomatic installations. In addition to their national interests, we hear that France was or is protecting our remaining troops confined at the Bangui airport. On what grounds? If this is genuine protection by the French troops, why are there pictures of Seleka rebels driving around in South African vehicles? At first glance our soldiers were caught in a political crossfire and it appears as if France did not take kindly to former President Bozizé giving mineral rights to South Africa and China. The United Democratic Movement (UDM) recommends that after this humiliation of our Defence Force, our foreign policy and our country, it would be better to make an immediate tactical withdrawal. Should South Africa have a desire to re-enter this stage, it must be a sanctioned resolution of the African Union or the United Nations, especially since the bilateral agreement with our former “friend” is defunct because he is no longer in power. The UDM suggests that South Africa swallows its pride, come home to lick our wounds and start afresh. Parliament would have failed its oversight duty if it does not endorse a need to establish a commission inquiry to ascertain, amongst other things, exactly which South African assets, as mentioned by the Minister of Defence, needed the protection of the SANDF. Such an inquiry would clarify the confusion that was created when the Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation (Deputy-Minister Ebrahim) said that the SANDF was deployed to protect the former CAR president (Operation Morero) versus what the Minister of Defence and the Presidency said about training operations only, with no mention of the protection of the former president. The Inquiry will also help to verify whether there had in fact been any training conducted by the SANDF in that Country over the last two years. Yours sincerely, Bantu Holomisa, MP President of the United Democratic Movement
