The South African National Defence Union (SANDU) has strongly criticized Phiroane Phala, co-chair of the Standing Committee on Defence, alleging that the committee has misled the South African public regarding living conditions for soldiers at Fort Ikapa in the Western Cape.
SANDU chief negotiator Jeff Dubazana stated that Phala’s recent remarks dismissing soldiers’ grievances were “dismissive and insensitive,” arguing that the concerns raised exposed serious shortcomings in the state’s provision of adequate accommodation for its troops.
“Initially when these matters were brought to us, we took the whole situation as a scandal by those who are in charge of this department,” Dubazana said. “However, what’s hard to understand and to believe is that the defence committee was there at Fort Ikapa on Wednesday. They went to this particular hanger where our members are accommodated and saw the conditions. Secondly, they were given a presentation by the most senior management of this department. And yet soon thereafter, on Thursday, the chairperson of the standing committee goes out and issues a statement that was fraught with lies, nothing else but lies.”
Dubazana emphasized that Phala was not only misleading soldiers but the entire country about conditions that senior management itself had described as uninhabitable. He further noted that on Thursday, the same day Phala issued his statement, the soldiers were relocated from the hanger to new accommodation at a step plant—a move Dubazana said “defies common sense.”
“If conditions at Fort Ikapa were habitable, why would they be relocated?” Dubazana questioned.
SANDU confirmed it is proceeding with High Court action scheduled for the 9th regarding the conditions its members were subjected to. Dubazana clarified that while the soldiers’ current accommodation consists of bungalows that are habitable, the facilities remain “far less than a one-star hotel,” contrary to suggestions made by the committee chair. The union’s demands before the court are straightforward: habitable accommodation and food that meets acceptable standards.
Regarding internal grievance mechanisms, Dubazana explained that formal processes can take approximately three months to resolve—timeframes ill-suited to urgent deployment scenarios. This delay, he argued, is why unions often intervene through alternative measures when immediate action is required.
Dubazana also addressed broader concerns about troop morale and discipline. He acknowledged that soldiers returning from deployment in the Democratic Republic of Congo had expressed a desire to protest publicly, but SANDU had discouraged such action to prevent national instability. “If we had agreed to take our members to the streets, what was going to be the end result?” he asked.
Despite these efforts, Dubazana admitted it is becoming increasingly difficult to manage growing discontent among members. “Once you are trying to correct something, something else crops up,” he said. “The most disturbing thing is we are not getting any support from anywhere to deal with whatever problems our members are facing.”
When asked to assess current morale on a scale of one to ten, Dubazana indicated that relocation had improved spirits to above five. However, he stressed that morale remains hampered by the perception that leadership has not been truthful about the challenges troops face.
SANDU maintains that its members remain highly disciplined, even amid what Dubazana described as an “impossible situation.” The union continues to pursue legal recourse to secure adequate living conditions and support for deployed personnel.
