Yesterday's state security budget vote saw State Security Minister David Mahlobo raise spectres of civil society organisations working to destabilise the government and of the EFF trying to violently overthrow the government.
Nevertheless, Mahlobo gave the assurance that South Africa was “strong, stable and safe”.
Speaking in parliament, Mahlobo said that “South Africa cannot take lightly any manifestations in our society and body politic that have the potential to advocate for unconstitutional change of government”.
He said globally, “non-state actors” such as the media, non-governmental organisations, foreign multinational companies, funders of opposition parties, religious and student organisations were running “covert intelligence networks to destabilise other countries who do not share their views”.
He said in SA, “some NGOs have made it their preoccupation to destabilise the government”.
Mahlobo told the media afterwards that he would not name the organisations he was accusing, but “we know what we are dealing with”.
He said some NGOs were “very funny” and “we know, from their actions, they are working for other agencies”.
He said some foreign NGOs could not explain where their funding came from, who their directors were and what work they were doing.
“When you go to their premises, they are highly securitised.”
It has emerged previously that during a state security briefing in parliament, agents accused the Right2Know campaign of working with other countries as spies.
And while Mahlobo did not name them, yesterday he decried those who “are shouting: You are following us”.
The Right2Know campaign has been vocal about the security agency’s surveillance methods and yesterday handed over a memorandum at parliament stating their concerns that surveillance was “untransparent, open to abuse and a major threat to human rights in South Africa”.
EFF leader Julius Malema also appears to have cropped up on state security’s radar, following his statements last week that the party would remove the government “at the barrel of a gun” should they violently suppress protests.
Mahlobo said that while “everyone has a right to express themselves” Malema had been in contravention of the law.
However, he said that the ANC had laid a charge and that it would be investigated by the correct agencies.
ANC MP and chair of the joint standing committee on Intelligence Connie September told parliament that the claims should be investigated “because it can be a threat to the state”.
Deputy Minister of State Security Ellen Molekane meanwhile questioned how Malema could be allowed to call himself “commander-in-chief”.
“I want to know which army is Malema the commander-in-chief of,” she said adding that President Jacob Zuma should be the only one in the country to carry the title.
She said that the opposition was also attempting to use the Constitutional Court judgment as a basis to agitate for the “undemocratic removal of the president”.
She later said that the judgment had not been what some political parties had “wished for” and they were making a “hoo ha” about it in an attempt to get the president to step down or encourage voters to vote for them instead.
Molekane defended the president saying that while his actions had been deemed to be inconsistent with the constitution, many pieces of legislation were also found to be inconsistent with the constitution.
Minister’s assurance: SA is safe
Nevertheless, Mahlobo gave the assurance that South Africa was “strong, stable and safe”.
Speaking in parliament, Mahlobo said that “South Africa cannot take lightly any manifestations in our society and body politic that have the potential to advocate for unconstitutional change of government”.
He said globally, “non-state actors” such as the media, non-governmental organisations, foreign multinational companies, funders of opposition parties, religious and student organisations were running “covert intelligence networks to destabilise other countries who do not share their views”.
He said in SA, “some NGOs have made it their preoccupation to destabilise the government”.
Mahlobo told the media afterwards that he would not name the organisations he was accusing, but “we know what we are dealing with”.
He said some NGOs were “very funny” and “we know, from their actions, they are working for other agencies”.
He said some foreign NGOs could not explain where their funding came from, who their directors were and what work they were doing.
“When you go to their premises, they are highly securitised.”
It has emerged previously that during a state security briefing in parliament, agents accused the Right2Know campaign of working with other countries as spies.
And while Mahlobo did not name them, yesterday he decried those who “are shouting: You are following us”.
The Right2Know campaign has been vocal about the security agency’s surveillance methods and yesterday handed over a memorandum at parliament stating their concerns that surveillance was “untransparent, open to abuse and a major threat to human rights in South Africa”.
EFF leader Julius Malema also appears to have cropped up on state security’s radar, following his statements last week that the party would remove the government “at the barrel of a gun” should they violently suppress protests.
Mahlobo said that while “everyone has a right to express themselves” Malema had been in contravention of the law.
However, he said that the ANC had laid a charge and that it would be investigated by the correct agencies.
ANC MP and chair of the joint standing committee on Intelligence Connie September told parliament that the claims should be investigated “because it can be a threat to the state”.
Deputy Minister of State Security Ellen Molekane meanwhile questioned how Malema could be allowed to call himself “commander-in-chief”.
“I want to know which army is Malema the commander-in-chief of,” she said adding that President Jacob Zuma should be the only one in the country to carry the title.
She said that the opposition was also attempting to use the Constitutional Court judgment as a basis to agitate for the “undemocratic removal of the president”.
She later said that the judgment had not been what some political parties had “wished for” and they were making a “hoo ha” about it in an attempt to get the president to step down or encourage voters to vote for them instead.
Molekane defended the president saying that while his actions had been deemed to be inconsistent with the constitution, many pieces of legislation were also found to be inconsistent with the constitution.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos