SANDF Dismisses Claims of Defiance by Chief Maphwanya Toward Angie Motshekga

The South African National Defence Force (SANDF) has moved to dispel media reports alleging that its Chief, General Rudzani Maphwanya, is defying the authority of the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, Angie Motshekga.

This follows a City Press report on Sunday claiming that General Maphwanya had vowed not to comply with the Minister’s directive to reinstate Colonel Eugene Motati, an air force officer dismissed in 2019 on the basis of an untested sexual harassment allegation.

Background of the Case

Colonel Motati’s dismissal traces back to a complaint lodged by a South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) journalist. The allegation, however, was never tested in a court of law. In 2022, the Military Ombudsman reviewed the case and concluded that the dismissal was unlawful, recommending that corrective action be taken.

Minister Motshekga reportedly endorsed this finding, issuing a directive for Motati to be reinstated. The report suggested that General Maphwanya resisted the instruction, creating tensions at the highest levels of the defence force.

SANDF’s Response

In a formal statement, the SANDF strongly rejected the narrative, describing the report as “incorrect, misleading, and a misrepresentation of the facts.”

“It is not in the nature of the SANDF to discuss its members’ administrative matters in the public media, so are the Ombudsman’s recommendations and ministerial decisions,” the statement read.

The SANDF emphasised that suggestions of open defiance by General Maphwanya were “baseless and irresponsible.”

“General Maphwanya remains fully committed to the constitutional authority of the Minister and is engaging the matter with the utmost respect and diligence,” the SANDF said.

Governance and Military Protocol

The Defence Force further explained that General Maphwanya is adhering to established governance principles and military protocol by engaging directly with both the Minister and the Ombudsman on the matter.

“Any insinuation that the Chief of the SANDF is ‘giving the middle finger’ to the Minister is unfounded,” the statement continued, reaffirming that discussions are taking place through proper channels.

The SANDF assured the public that due process is being followed and that any final decision will comply with the law, internal military regulations, and the directives of the Executive Authority.

Broader Implications

The matter highlights the delicate balance between civilian authority and military command in South Africa’s democratic system. The Constitution places the armed forces under civilian oversight, with the Minister of Defence holding executive authority over strategic and administrative decisions.

Analysts note that allegations of defiance, even if unfounded, can create reputational risks for both the military and government institutions. Defence experts argue that the SANDF’s credibility depends on strict adherence to civilian authority, good governance, and transparency in handling disciplinary matters.

Way Forward

For now, the SANDF has confirmed that consultations are ongoing and that it will not be drawn into discussing sensitive internal administrative matters in the media. Stakeholders, including Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Defence, are expected to monitor the outcome of the case closely.

The institution’s stance is clear: the authority of the Minister remains intact, and the SANDF leadership remains committed to constitutional order, discipline, and respect for due process.