SADC's secret power shift: Who really controls southern Africa?
Image: SADC
IN a move that could redefine regional governance in Southern Africa, South Africa's parliamentary committees have thrown their weight behind a transformative, and contentious, vision for the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) Regional Parliament.
But as the draft protocol undergoes scrutiny, critical questions emerge: Will this body become a genuine legislative force, or will it remain another bureaucratic talk shop?
This week, the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation and the Select Committee on Security and Justice adopted a draft report on the Sadc Protocol on the Regional Parliament, demanding sweeping changes to empower the institution.
The committees, led by chairpersons Supra Mahumapelo and Jane Mananiso, insisted that the regional parliament must evolve beyond its current advisory role into a binding law-making authority.
'Members strongly called for the Sadc Regional Parliament to gain legislative powers,' according to a statement issued by the Parliamentary Communication Services on behalf of the chairpersons, pushing for oversight over peacekeeping missions, trade relations, and human rights — a direct challenge to the sovereignty-resistant tendencies of some Sadc member states.
But will governments cede such authority? The proposal is ambitious, particularly given Sadc's history of slow-moving consensus politics. The draft protocol, as it stands, requires decisions to be made by consensus, with a simple majority as a fallback. However, the committees demanded even stricter thresholds for key appointments, proposing that a two-thirds majority should decide the election of the plenary assembly's president, vice-president, and secretary-general.
One of the most striking recommendations is the call for full public and media access to plenary sessions. 'In the interest of facilitating transparent and participatory democracies, the committees proposed that all sessions be open,' the statement read. This would mark a radical departure from the opaque dealings often associated with regional bodies.
Yet, scepticism remains. Will Sadc leaders, many of whom govern with tight control over domestic media, truly embrace such transparency? Or will this provision be diluted under pressure from more authoritarian-leaning member states?
The committees also took aim at Article 35, which governs withdrawals from the treaty. They proposed an automatic termination clause, ensuring that if a country exits Sadc, its parliamentary representation collapses immediately. This could prevent lingering legal ambiguities but might also spark resistance from nations wary of rigid commitments.
Moreover, the draft was criticised for lacking detail on the parliament's structure. The committees demanded a clear hierarchy, defined committee requirements, and systematic rules for member removal and financial oversight. 'The protocol should also provide for the removal of persons and the filling of vacancies, all of which need to be systematically detailed in the document,' the statement read.
Perhaps the most forward-looking suggestion was the call to explore ties between the Sadc Parliament and other legislative bodies, including the Pan-African Parliament (PAP) and regional economic blocs. 'The committees proposed that consideration be given to whether there should be any relationship between the Sadc Parliament and the Pan-African Parliament,' the statement read.
If implemented, this could signal a shift toward deeper continental integration — but it also risks overburdening an institution still struggling to define its own mandate.
The recommendations are bold, but their fate now rests in the hands of Sadc's member states. Will they embrace a stronger, more transparent regional parliament, or will political self-interest prevail?
As Mahumapelo and Mananiso's committees push for change, one thing is clear: The battle over Sadc's future governance is just beginning. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
2 days ago
- IOL News
Elon Musk's Starlink will have to wait for years – or find a way around B-BBEE laws ahead of G20
President Cyril Ramaphosa denied harbouring ideas of relaxing economic transformation laws to benefit tech billionaire Elon Musk after his recent visit to the US. In his recent weekly letter to the nation, Ramaphosa reaffirmed South Africa's commitment to broad-based economic policies that are central to fostering inclusive and sustainable economic growth. Image: Presidency Pretoria-born tech tycoon Elon Musk will have to wait for about two years before his Starlink satellite internet company can legally enter the South African market – a vital area for the service to operate optimally in the region. Starlink – already available in a number of Southern African Development Community (SADC) and other countries on the continent – is reportedly aiming to launch its services in SA ahead of the G20 conference hosted by South Africa and opening in November. But the company still intends to bypass the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) law and its 30% previously disadvantaged individual ownership laws that Musk has labelled as 'racist', preferring instead to go the Equity Equivalent Investment Programme route, which on its own is not enough to be granted a licence. 'The wheels of government don't mill that fast,' said Paul Colmer, an executive committee member of the Wireless Access Providers' Association (WAPA), a non-profit wireless industry association established in 2006. Speaking to the Pretoria News on Wednesday about their 2025 WAPALOZA conference held in Muldersdrift near Johannesburg from June 23-25, Colmer estimated that it would take about two years for the Electronic Communications Act to be amended. He based this on a presentation by a legal practitioner who made a presentation at the conference. He said as things stood, to 'sidetrack' the B-BBEE requirements there would need to be a change in legislation, which is a 'long process'. There were other ways Starlink could speed up its entry into South Africa, including through partnering with local entities that already have the required B-BBEE status, but Musk and Starlink reportedly "really, really do not like the idea of middle-men". The company and its representatives have also been accused of using Musk's proximity to US President Donald Trump and members of his administration to expand across Africa and in other countries. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading Colmer said Starlink, which has been 'overhyped' when there were other similar service providers to choose from, was discussed at their conference but was not the main topic. The key points of discussion included spectrum sharing – a major source of opportunities for the smaller local wireless internet service provider (WISP) following Icasa's recent legislation amendment – and artificial intelligence (AI). However, Colmer said his personal highlight was the technical presentations or regulatory discussions – it was the inspirational human stories of innovation and perseverance, especially that of Songezo Mhambi from the underserved Eastern Cape who spoke on "How I Built a WISP". He said Mhambi started with network switches on his bed because the roof was leaking everywhere else, literally sleeping with his network equipment. He fought to get bank funding, overcame incredible hurdles, and now he's expanding and creating employment. Today, Songezo is, among other things, founder and CEO at Mdaswifi, founder at Vice-Tech, a renowned tech entrepreneur and a 'digital evangelist'. Colmer said he wished he could clone Mhambi because people like him are the solution to getting everyone in South Africa connected. A representative from the Independent Communications Authority of SA (Icasa) spoke about the connectivity ecosystem, emphasising how different forms of wireless technology can complement rather than simply compete with each other. Various connectivity solutions – from cellular to wi-fi to satellite – each have unique strengths and weaknesses that can together create a robust network ecosystem able to reliably and economically serve communities across South Africa's diverse landscape. Describing the conference as a success and welcoming the 'pragmatic optimism' displayed, Colmer reiterated his view that Starlink was 'overhyped' and dismissed concerns that Musk's constellation was going to kill the smaller wireless connectivity operators. In his conference summary he said: 'Yes, Starlink is coming, but OneWeb is already legally available in South Africa. Amazon's Project Kuiper is on the way. The Chinese are building their own constellation. 'But here's what I think got lost in all the hype: Starlink isn't the WISP killer some people fear it is. It has real limitations – downloading certain apps is problematic, WhatsApp calling isn't ideal. It's going to be complementary rather than primary. In countries that initially moved from WISPs to Starlink, many have actually moved back to WISPs.'
Daily Maverick
4 days ago
- Daily Maverick
Does SADC's post-conflict peace plan marginalise transitional justice?
Without several amendments to its draft framework the Southern African Development Community will struggle to help member states address their abusive pasts. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) has embarked on a commendable and much-needed peacebuilding initiative to help prevent the recurrence of violence and authoritarian backsliding in the region. Countries in southern Africa are marked by prolonged colonial and postcolonial violence, repressive regimes and entrenched inequalities, and need coherent policies to guide them towards justice, reconciliation and sustainable peace. Member states recently met in Johannesburg to discuss a draft framework that facilitates the design and implementation of post-conflict reconstruction and development (PCRD) and transitional justice initiatives. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads SADC lags behind its counterparts, such as the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, in developing a PCRD framework. But this initiative positions it as the first regional body in Africa to formally circulate a draft transitional justice policy for member states to consider. Instead of developing two distinct frameworks, the SADC opted to integrate PCRD and transitional justice into one cohesive document. For this approach to work, both domains need adequate attention, but the current draft disproportionately favours PCRD at the expense of transitional justice. While PCRD and transitional justice share overlapping concerns and can be complementary, they have distinct mandates, methodologies and normative foundations. PCRD typically emphasises infrastructure development, state capacity building and institutional reform, whereas transitional justice focuses on redress, accountability and societal healing. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads The draft also lacks reference to contemporary and regionally relevant developments in the transitional justice field. It draws on the 2004 United Nations definition of transitional justice, thereby overlooking the African Union Transitional Justice Policy, adopted in 2019 by all AU member states, including those in the SADC. The AU policy is grounded in African norms, values and approaches – including traditional justice systems – and offers a regionally relevant and contextually appropriate framework. By failing to reference the policy and incorporate its definition, the SADC's draft does not reflect member states' sociopolitical and cultural contexts. Also, the draft's narrow conceptualisation of transitional justice limits its application to post-conflict contexts, overlooking the legacies of authoritarianism. Numerous southern African states have faced governance-related abuses long after active conflict has ended, including systemic corruption, enforced disappearances and the suppression of dissent. Transitional justice mechanisms must address post-conflict and post-authoritarian contexts, since both generate serious human rights violations that require recognition and redress. Another notable omission is mental health and psychosocial support. Although such support is not explicit in the AU policy, it has become essential to contemporary transitional justice and peacebuilding efforts. Survivors of violence often carry hidden scars – trauma, stigma and social dislocation – that traditional transitional justice pillars alone cannot heal. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Experts and practitioners increasingly advocate for mainstreaming mental health support across all transitional justice pillars, while some suggest treating it as a distinct element altogether. A credible transitional justice framework must incorporate such support, not only to promote individual recovery, but to enhance societal cohesion and resilience. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Moreover, the SADC draft does not adequately anticipate the implications of emerging threats – particularly climate change and environmental degradation – on peace and justice in the region. Given the SADC's reliance on natural resources and agriculture, the connections between ecological stress, conflict and transitional justice must be articulated. Many human rights violations in the region have a cross-border dimension, rendering a purely national approach inadequate. Conflicts and repression, for example in Cabo Delgado in Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo, often involve more than one state, spilling across borders due to porous boundaries and shared ethnic or political identities. The framework should provide a basis for cross-border investigations, transnational reparation schemes and regional truth commissions. Regional organisations are well positioned to support and sustain such initiatives. Furthermore, transitional justice within the SADC must address not only civil and political rights violations, but also violations of economic and social rights – an area where the AU policy remains comparatively underdeveloped. Land dispossession, extractive exploitation, systemic corruption, state capture and poverty should be viewed not merely as development issues, but also as matters of justice. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads This has been acknowledged to varying degrees by transitional justice processes in Sierra Leone, Chad, Ethiopia and Liberia, and in cases before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. A comprehensive framework shouldn't consider transitional justice in isolation. Recent experiences highlight the need for complementarity with other peacebuilding mechanisms such as peace processes, PCRD, national dialogues and disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration programmes. The SADC framework should guide countries on coordinating and sequencing these processes. Furthermore, the final framework must go beyond articulating principles to providing actionable guidance for member states. This includes strategies for contextualising transitional justice at the national level, building institutional capacity to engage with communities, and promoting decentralised implementation. Transitional justice must be pursued through both top-down and bottom-up approaches. The SADC framework should actively promote inclusive, participatory and decentralised mechanisms that engage communities, civil society organisations and local institutions alongside government actors. Equally important is the question of monitoring and oversight. The SADC may consider the AU policy, which empowers the AU Commission to monitor national transitional justice initiatives. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Parallel mechanisms could enable the SADC Secretariat to support and guide member states. Enhanced collaboration with the AU Commission in Addis Ababa would ensure regional coherence and technical rigour during implementation. Ultimately, the SADC region needs a transitional justice policy that is not only aligned with AU instruments and informed by regional and international best practices, but also reflects consultations with stakeholders, civil society and communities. Whether developed as part of the current integrated draft or through a standalone transitional justice framework, the core elements, principles, cross-cutting issues and benchmarks must be identified and agreed on. Without these revisions, the SADC risks falling short of its potential to support member states in confronting their authoritarian and violent pasts and in laying the foundations for justice, reconciliation and peace. DM John G Ikubaje, head, Transitional Justice Unit, Political Affairs, Peace and Security Department, AU Commission; and Tadesse Simie Metekia, senior researcher, Special Projects, Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Addis Ababa. First published by ISS Today.
The Herald
4 days ago
- The Herald
SANDF meets with Sandu over unpaid allowances for DRC deployment
The South African National Defence Force (SANDF) has held an urgent meeting with the South African National Defence Union (Sandu) after the union's public outcry over unpaid allowances for troops deployed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The SANDF said the meeting came after the union issued a statement and circulated a video on its social media platforms regarding outstanding allowances related to the SAMIDRC deployment under Operation Thiba, part of the Sadc Mission in the DRC. SundayTimes reported that soldiers have turned their anger on their own top brass over a pay dispute, saying they are owed at least R600,000 each. One of the aggrieved soldiers told the Sunday Times he and his fellow troops should have been paid R100,000 a month during their 15-month deployment as part of a Southern African Development Community force in the eastern DRC, but had received only R58,000. The SANDF expressed concern that Sandu had released the statement without first following the established process of direct engagement with it.. 'This occurred while the SANDF was still in the process of demobilising the deployed members and addressing payment-related and other administrative matters internally,' said SANDF spokesperson Rear-Admiral Prince Tshabalala. Tshabalala said the meeting focused on clarifying the status of outstanding allowances and emphasising the importance of effective and respectful communication between the SANDF and recognised unions, in line with the Bargaining Council framework. 'During the meeting, Sandu was cautioned that issuing public statements on unresolved internal matters without prior consultation may lead to misinformation and miscommunication, potentially undermining the morale of troops and affecting the command and control structures of the SANDF,' he said. However, despite these concerns, the meeting was conducted in a cordial and constructive spirit, he said. Tshabalala said both parties committed to continued engagement to resolve the outstanding issues. He added that a follow-up meeting would be scheduled. TimesLIVE
