Parliament, Monday, 19 October 2026 –The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation, Mr Supra Mahumapelo, has noted the open letter addressed to the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Mr Ronald Lamola, written by Mr Ernst Roets on behalf of Lex Libertas, in which he names the Chairperson.
The committee welcomes engagement from all sectors of society, including its critics. That is the nature of a constitutional democracy.
For the record, the Chairperson wishes to clarify his position:
1. On Parliament, freedom of speech and citizenship
No one in the committee has proposed that citizenship be withdrawn as punishment for holding a different political view. The committee is fully aware of Section 20 of the Constitution, which provides that no citizen may be deprived of citizenship, and the recent Constitutional Court judgment in Democratic Alliance v Minister of Home Affairs, which reaffirmed the profound importance of citizenship.
What was raised in Parliament last week was a principled policy question that Parliament is entitled to raise under Section 55(2) of the Constitution: How should South Africa, as a sovereign state, respond when private organisations systematically engage with foreign governments to impose punitive economic measures, visa restrictions and public narratives that harm South Africa’s national interest?
This is not about disagreement. It is about conduct. Freedom of expression under Section 16 does not include propaganda for war, incitement to imminent violence, or advocacy that seeks to deliberately misrepresent the country for material advantage.
2. On misinformation and truth
Mr Roets asks the government to identify what is allegedly false. The committee will do so plainly:
The claim that there is state-sponsored “white genocide” or state-sanctioned “farm attacks” in South Africa is false. Crime statistics, court judgments and independent fact-checkers have repeatedly shown this.
The claim that the Expropriation Act of 2024 allows arbitrary seizure of land without compensation or judicial oversight is false. Section 25 of the Constitution and the Act itself require just and equitable compensation and court adjudication.
The claim that broad-based black economic empowerment amounts to “race-based discrimination” that justifies foreign sanctions is a deliberate distortion of a constitutionally mandated redress measure under Section 9(2).
When such claims are taken to the United States and presented as fact to secure visa bans on South Africans, trade penalties and aid withdrawals that affect ordinary citizens, it ceases to be domestic debate, it becomes a foreign policy matter that this committee must oversee.
3. On treason, legislation and the rule of law
No draft Bill has been tabled. No citizen has been charged. The committee was exploring, as committees do, whether existing legal frameworks – including the Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act, the Protection of Constitutional Democracy Against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, and the Codes of Conduct for civil society organisations – are adequate.
Mr Roets correctly distinguishes between the rule of law and rule by law. The committee agrees. Any future legislative proposal, if it emerges, will have to pass constitutional muster, public participation under Section 59 and judicial scrutiny. That is precisely the safeguard he calls for.
4. On dialogue
The committee rejects the notion of “ceremonial listening”. The invitation to engage is genuine. Parliament has held committee meetings/public hearings on the Expropriation Act, on B-BBEE, on the state of US–SA relations. Lex Libertas and other organisations were free to participate. Many chose not to.
If Lex Libertas seeks genuine dialogue rather than selective international lobbying, the committee’s door is open. As a Committee, we want to make it plainly clear that, neither Lex Libertas nor any of its representatives has ever approached the committee for audience. It is therefore not just misleading but disingenuous for Mr Roets to create his own imaginary reality suggesting that all doors of engagement are closed. Lex Libertas should present its evidence on farm attacks, property rights and transformation legislation under oath, in public and subject to questioning.
That is the appropriate forum for evidence and counter-evidence, not a foreign legislature.
5. On patriotism and the national interest
The government is not South Africa. The committee agrees. But South Africa is also not a private organisation. When unemployment is 32.9%, when 600 US companies employing 250 000 South Africans operate here, and when our access to AGOA and PEPFAR and concessional funding is under review, organised campaigns that actively encourage disinvestment and sanctions have real consequences for workers, farmers and the poor – black and white.
To criticise the government because you love South Africa is patriotic. To invite foreign punishment of South Africa because you dislike the government is something else entirely.
Mr Mahumapelo said: “We will not threaten anyone but we will not be intimidated out of our oversight role either. If anyone has evidence of wrongdoing by government, bring it to Parliament. Bring it to court. Bring it to the Chapter 9 institutions.
“What we cannot accept is a practice where some citizens consistently fail to engage domestic institutions and instead seek to become interlocutors for foreign governments on how to punish South Africa. That practice is not new in our history, and Parliament has a duty to name it and examine it.
“My call for consequences was not a call to strip citizenship arbitrarily. It was a call for accountability for misinformation that harms the country. If Mr Roets is confident his claims are true, he should welcome an opportunity to defend them before Parliament with evidence. Threats will not silence anyone. But neither will accusations of threats silence Parliament.
We hope that the narrative by Libertas et al, is not one of the methods to create a possible victim whose rescue plan among others is embedded in the thirst of fundraising for those concerned.
“The committee will continue its work to recalibrate US–SA relations, protect South Africa’s sovereignty and constitutional order, and defend the rights of all South Africans, including the right to disagree.”
ISSUED BY PARLIAMENTARY COMMUNICATION SERVICES ON BEHALF OF MR SUPRA MAHUMAPELO, CHAIRPERSON OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND COOPERATION.
For media inquiries or interview requests, please contact the committee’s Media Officer:
Name: Sureshinee Govender (Ms)
Cell: 081 704 1109
E-mail: sugovender@parliament.gov.za
Arrange a tour