PRETORIA — The Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) has initiated a historic legal challenge against the South African government regarding active arms exports to the US, filing an application in the Pretoria High Court to suspend and cancel all active conventional arms export permits to the United States.
The legal battle marks a significant precedent, believed to be the first case in South Africa seeking to hold arms transfers to a permanent member of the UN Security Council accountable on human rights and international law grounds. The South African government has formally indicated its opposition to the application.
Dr. Atilla Kisla, International Justice Cluster Lead at SALC, explained that the application is fundamentally rooted in the National Conventional Arms Control Act. Under Section 14 of the act, the National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC)—the administrative body responsible for deciding on export permits—has a mandatory obligation to suspend or cancel permits if they are not in the interest of maintaining or promoting international peace.
According to Dr. Kisla, SALC’s application demonstrates how a pattern of international law violations by the US constitutes a direct threat to international peace and security, thereby triggering the NCACC’s legal obligation to halt these arms transfers.
The litigation outlines four distinct situations forming the basis of this pattern of violations:
- The US decision in January 2025 to lift a hold on arms exports to Israel.
- US attacks on Iran in June 2025.
- A territorial and UN Charter violation in January 2026, when US forces entered Venezuelan territory and captured the sitting head of state.
- The ongoing Iran war, which began on February 28, 2026, and has been qualified by the South African presidency as a serious threat to regional and international peace and security.
Dr. Kisla noted that the legal argument is supported not only by SALC’s international law assessments but also by evaluations from the UN Secretary-General, UN special apparatus, and statements from South African state officials.
The government’s notice to oppose, filed by the NCACC chairperson and the Minister of Defense, signals a strong defense of the current trade arrangements. However, Dr. Kisla argued that the government’s stance contradicts South Africa’s own established foreign policy.
The application highlights previous statements by high-ranking officials, including the Director General of International Relations and the President, which support SALC’s case. Furthermore, Minister Lamola recently reiterated that South Africa does not send arms to a country in conflict. Dr. Kisla pointed out that the US has been in armed conflict since at least February 28, 2026.
Addressing the broader implications of the case, Dr. Kisla emphasized that the litigation is not about politics, diplomacy, or financial relations. Instead, it is strictly about the rule of law and ensuring that an administrative body fulfills its mandatory obligations under the NCACC Act when the requirements for undermining international peace are met.
The details of the government’s answering affidavit remain pending as the ongoing litigation proceeds in the High Court.
