UDM LOGO

Vision

We are the political home of all South Africans, united in the spirit of South Africanism by our common passion for our Country, mobilising the creative power inherent in our rich diversity, towards our transformation into a Winning Nation.

Mission

We will unite South Africans from all communities in a new political home, built on the foundation of the principles and ideals of our National Constitution. To this end we will address poverty and imbalances in our society, inspired by our unifying love of our Country and its people.

Core Values

The Core Values, which the United Democratic Movement will uphold and promote and upon which its fundamental policy positions are based, are as follow : respect for life, dignity and human worth of every individual; integrity in public- and private life; the individual rights and freedoms enshrined in our Country’s Constitution;

President of the UDM

Mr Bantu Holomisa

Major General (Retired) Bantubonke ‘Bantu’ Holomisa co-founded the United Democratic Movement (UDM) on 27 September 1997, and serves as its elected President, which in 2022 celebrated its 25th year of existence. He was again elected as a Member of Parliament in the 2024 National and Provincial Elections and was appointed as the Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans in the Government of National Unity in the 7th Administration in President Cyril Ramaphosa’s cabinet.

He was the Commander of the Transkei Defence Force and Head of the Transkei Government (former independent homeland from 1987 to 1994) up to the first National Elections in South Africa in 1994. He was one of the first two black persons accepted by the South African Army College to do a one-year senior staff course for officers in 1984.

Your voice matters. Unite with us and create a change you want to see.

Meet Our Party Leaders

UDM VICTORIES

UDM Victory on the Campaign for Transparent and Equitable Party Funding

Since its inception, the UDM has advocated for transparency in party funding. The party has aligned itself with the views of organisations like the (now defunct) Institute for Democratic Alternatives in South Africa (Idasa), which recognised that transparency benefits the public interest. At that time, a common trend was for large businesses to donate to parties in government or before elections, often with the expectation of securing government contracts once the party gained power. This practice persisted over the years. For years, the major political parties declined to make their financial records public, fuelling the perception that they were influenced by wealthy donors. Meanwhile, the UDM stood alone, advocating for transparency and consistently pushing for openness regarding party finances. The UDM’s efforts were finally validated in 2019 with the enactment of the Political Party Funding Act. This law mandates parties to disclose donations above a certain threshold from any single donor. It also bars contributions from foreign governments or state entities. Moreover, it strictly regulates donations, specifying that they must be for party political purposes and received by party members on behalf of the party. It’s unfortunate that with the signing of the Electoral Amendment Act on the eve of the 2024 National and Provincial Elections, President Ramaphosa has rolled back many of the gains for our multi-party democracy. This action means that the African National Congress once again receives the largest portion of party funding.

UDM Victory on the the Establishment if the Mpati Commission

In May 2018, the UDM penned a letter to President Ramaphosa and then serving as Deputy Chief Justice, Raymond Zondo, highlighting alleged corruption at the Public Investment Corporation (PIC). The allegations centred on serious corruption, evasion of due diligence, misrepresentation, money laundering, and staff purging (potentially for a cover-up) in PIC deals. These actions posed a significant risk to the Government Employees Pension Fund pensioners and the pensions of government employees. The UDM continued to exert pressure on government by adding information to the original complaint. The UDM’s persistent advocacy on the issue prompted the establishment of the Mpati Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of Impropriety regarding the Public Investment Corporation. This commission was established by presidential proclamation in October 2018. The UDM’s stance was validated by the findings and recommendations of the Mpati Commission, which were released in 2020. As of 2023, the party continues to advocate for the implementation of these recommendations.

UDM Victory on the the NSFAS R2million rental scandal

In February 2023, the UDM uncovered significant wasteful expenditure at the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS). This revelation came at a time when students were experiencing delays in receiving their payments, and some were being denied access to much-needed funds altogether. NSFAS had relocated to a new building using a turn-key solution, resulting in a substantial increase in rental costs. The monthly rent reportedly escalated from R500,000 to R1,968,647.05, despite many offices in the new premises remaining unused. This expenditure was deemed wasteful by the UDM. Furthermore, NSFAS allegedly purchased new furniture for the office space, amounting to millions of rands, instead of utilising existing furniture from their former offices. In light of these findings, the UDM called upon the Hawks and the Special Investigating Unit to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter. The troubles at NSFAS worsened with the removal of CEO Andile Nongogo in October 2023 due to investigations into alleged irregularities. Following this, in April 2024, Ernest Khosa stepped down as chair of the board amidst accusations and counter-accusations of corruption. The situation at NSFAS deteriorated further when the board was dissolved, and an administrator was appointed shortly thereafter. The blame for the mess should be laid squarely at Minister Blade Nzimande’s door.

UDM Open Letters

20 May 2026
Request for urgent parliamentary oversight intervention and constitutional processing of the Joint Task Team report on SATBVC pension grievances
Ms Thokozile Didiza, MP  Speaker of the National Assembly Parliament of the Republic of South Africa PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Speaker Request for urgent parliamentary oversight intervention and constitutional processing of the Joint Task Team report on SATBVC pension grievances 1.    I refer to my correspondence addressed to your office on 21 August 2024 regarding the “Referral of the matter of the SATBVC pensioners’ matter to the Standing Committee on Finance”, wherein reference was made to my correspondence to the Standing Committee on Finance of the same date. In that correspondence, I recorded that during the State of the Nation Address debate in February 2023, President Cyril Ramaphosa stated as follows: “The Honourable Holomisa has raised the issue of the pensions of civil servants and military veterans from the TBVC states. These are indeed issues that need to be considered. The Deputy President heads a task team on benefits for military veterans, which has a workstream on pension. I have asked this task team to provide a report on this issue. I have further asked the Minister of Finance to set up a team to look into the pensions for civil servants from the TBVC states.” 2.    Subsequent to the President’s directive and following parliamentary engagement on the matter, the Joint Task Team (JTT) on grievances raised by the SATBVC States Committee was formally established in June 2025 with a tightly defined fact finding mandate to examine the specific concerns contained in the SATBVC States Committee’s March 2025 memorandum to Parliament and to report back to the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration and the Standing Committee on Finance within the agreed Terms of Reference. 3.    We now write regarding the Final Report of the JTT, dated 2 December 2025 and attached hereto for ease of reference, which was established through parliamentary processes to address the longstanding grievances raised by former employees of the South African, Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei (SATBVC) and self-governing states. 4.    As Parliament is aware, this matter has persisted for many years and predates the establishment of the JTT itself. Numerous affected former employees and pensioners have spent years seeking recognition, clarity and resolution regarding grievances linked to pension benefits, Past Discriminatory Practices (PDP) redress, leave gratuities and severance related matters arising from the democratic transition process. 5.    Tragically, many affected pensioners and former employees have already passed away without closure, without substantive resolution, and without seeing meaningful finality from the democratic state regarding grievances which Parliament itself considered sufficiently serious to warrant the establishment of the JTT. 6.    The JTT was formally constituted in June 2025 following parliamentary engagement and in the context of the President’s earlier directive that the matter receive attention. The JTT comprised representatives from: 6.1.    National Treasury; 6.2.    the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA); 6.3.    the Public Service Co ordinating Bargaining Council (PSCBC); 6.4.    the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF); 6.5.    the Government Pensions Administration Agency (GPAA); 6.6.    the Government Employees Pension Ombud (GEPO); 6.7.    and the SATBVC States Committee. 7.    While the JTT process resulted in the compilation of findings and recommendations which are now before Parliament, it is now May 2026 and there remains growing frustration among affected pensioners and the SATBVC States Committee regarding the apparent absence of meaningful parliamentary progression, structured engagement or visible implementation of the report’s recommendations. 8.    Importantly, while the report concludes that the technical amalgamation of pension systems into the GEPF was broadly administratively compliant, the report simultaneously and unequivocally acknowledges that significant unresolved grievances remain and that these matters now transcend narrow administrative remedies and enter the terrain of policy, legislation, constitutional redress and fiscal prioritisation. 9.    The report expressly recommends: 9.1.    the establishment of a high-level policy forum with political authority; 9.2.    continued parliamentary oversight; 9.3.    consideration of possible legislative and policy reforms; 9.4.    investigation into unresolved and unrecorded service-related matters; 9.5.    consideration of unresolved employer related liabilities; 9.6.    and further engagement regarding the Past Discriminatory Practices (PDP) Pension Redress Programme. 10.    In these circumstances, Parliament cannot rationally or constitutionally treat the matter as concluded merely because the JTT has completed its narrowly defined technical mandate. 11.    The report itself rejects such a conclusion. 12.    The JTT was neither a judicial commission nor a body empowered to determine final constitutional or restorative justice remedies. Its mandate did not extend to the implementation of legislative reforms, the creation of new fiscal measures, or the establishment of new compensation mechanisms. 13.    It follows that the completion of the JTT process does not extinguish Parliament’s constitutional oversight obligations in relation to the unresolved grievances identified in the report itself. 14.    Parliament initiated and facilitated this process. Parliament received the findings and recommendations. Parliament is therefore now seized with a constitutional responsibility to meaningfully process, consider and respond to the report and its recommendations. 15.    Equally, the institutions represented on the JTT, including National Treasury, the GEPF, the GPAA, the GEPO, the DPSA and the PSCBC, cannot now reasonably distance themselves from the unresolved matters identified in the report after having actively participated in the JTT process and contributed to its findings and recommendations. 16.    The participation of these institutions materially reinforces the legitimacy and seriousness of the unresolved grievances acknowledged in the report. 17.    Sections 42, 55 and 92 of the Constitution impose clear oversight obligations upon Parliament and the National Assembly in relation to accountability, responsiveness and constitutional governance. 18.    Parliament is therefore constitutionally required to ensure that matters involving unresolved historical disadvantage, acknowledged policy deficiencies and vulnerable affected persons are not permitted to lapse into procedural silence, indefinite delay or institutional inertia. 19.    The affected former employees and pensioners are overwhelmingly elderly and historically disadvantaged persons, many of whom continue to experience severe financial hardship linked to unresolved pension and employment related grievances arising from fragmented and unequal systems inherited by the democratic state. 20.    The magnitude and persistence of the grievances reflected in the JTT process itself underscore that this matter cannot reasonably be dismissed as isolated, anecdotal or administratively insignificant. The report records that more than 11,500 cases were submitted for consideration, while approximately 68,820 applications relating to the Past Discriminatory Practices (PDP) Pension Redress Programme were processed nationally. Importantly, the report further acknowledges the existence of thousands of duplicate, unresolved, disputed, error related and untraceable cases arising from fragmented historical records, administrative complications and longstanding dissatisfaction regarding the fairness and adequacy of the transition process. These figures demonstrate that the matter constitutes a large scale and enduring public grievance affecting vulnerable former public servants across multiple former administrations and geographical areas of the Republic. The scale of the matter itself therefore demands meaningful parliamentary oversight, constitutional sensitivity and a clearly defined institutional response. 21.    The constitutional values of dignity, equality, accountability, responsiveness and openness arise directly in relation to Parliament’s handling of this matter. 22.    We accordingly respectfully request that your office urgently ensure: 22.1.    That the Final JTT Report and accompanying memorandum be formally tabled before the relevant parliamentary structures without further delay; 22.2.    That the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration and the Standing Committee on Finance jointly schedule hearings on the report within a reasonable and defined timeframe; 22.3.    That National Treasury, the DPSA, GEPF, GPAA, GEPO and the PSCBC be formally invited to account to Parliament regarding: 22.3.1.    the findings of the JTT; 22.3.2.    the unresolved matters identified in the report; 22.3.3.    and the feasibility of further remedial, legislative or policy interventions; 22.4.    That Parliament determine whether the recommendations of the JTT require: 22.4.1.    legislative intervention; 22.4.2.    executive action; 22.4.3.    further parliamentary inquiry; 22.4.4.    or the establishment of the high-level policy forum recommended in the report; 22.5.    That affected pensioners and representatives of the SATBVC States Committee be afforded a further opportunity to make representations before Parliament regarding the unresolved matters identified in the report; 22.6.    That Parliament communicate, within a reasonable period, the intended process and proposed way forward arising from the report and recommendations of the JTT. 23.    We further respectfully place on record that recent constitutional jurisprudence has demonstrated the serious institutional and legal consequences that may arise where Parliament fails to discharge its constitutional oversight obligations rationally, meaningfully and in accordance with the Constitution. 24.    It would therefore be deeply concerning were this matter, after years of engagement and after the establishment of a formally constituted JTT involving multiple state institutions, to now effectively terminate through procedural inaction or indefinite delay despite the report itself acknowledging unresolved constitutional, policy and restorative justice questions. 25.    This matter concerns not merely pension administration, but the unfinished constitutional obligations of democratic transition, substantive equality and restorative justice for former public servants who served under fragmented and unequal systems inherited by the democratic state. 26.    We trust that your office will treat this matter with the seriousness, urgency and constitutional sensitivity it requires. Yours sincerely Maj Gen (Ret) Bantu Holomisa, MP Deputy Minister of Defence and Military Veterans President of the United Democratic Movement Copied to:    Mr CM Ramaphosa, President of the Republic of South Africa Mr E Godongwana, MP and Minister of Finance Inkosi M Buthelezi, MP and Minister for the Public Service and Administration Dr M Maswanganyi, MP, Standing Committee on Finance Chairperson  Mr J Naudé de Villiers, Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration Chairperson Mr M Mabesa, GEPF Principal Executive Officer  Mr F Baleni, GEPF Chairperson of Board of Trustees Adv M Ramabulana, GEPO Ombud Mr E Kekana, GEPO Vice Chairperson of the Board of Trustees Ms K Madiehe, GPAA Chief Executive Officer  Mr P Dlamini, PIC Chief Executive Officer  Dr D Masondo, PIC Chairperson of the Board Adv K Gcaleka, Public Protector Mr F De Bruin, PSCBC Sectary General Prof S Fikeni, PSCSA Chairperson Mr Dandala, SATBVC Task Team Secretary Mr T Ndabambi, Pensioners’ Representatives’ Committee Chairperson Mr N Kwankwa, MP, UDM Deputy President and Party Leader in Parliament
12 Mar 2026
Request for Parliament to accord appropriate recognition due to the late Mr Mosiuoa
12 March 2026 Ms Thokozile Didiza, MP Speaker of the National Assembly Parliament of the Republic of South Africa PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Speaker Request for Parliament to accord appropriate recognition due to the late Mr Mosiuoa Lekota 1.    I write to you on behalf of the United Democratic Movement (UDM) regarding the passing of the late Mr Mosiuoa Lekota, a veteran of the liberation struggle and a public servant whose contribution to South Africa’s democratic Parliament is beyond dispute. 2.    Mr Lekota served this country with distinction across several decades of public life. Of particular relevance to the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa (Parliament), he served as the inaugural Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) following the establishment of that institution under the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. In that capacity he presided over the second house of Parliament during the formative years of our democratic order and played a meaningful role in shaping the institutional culture and procedures of the NCOP. 3.    His broader record of service also includes his tenure as Premier of the Free State and later as Minister of Defence. Across these roles Mr Lekota remained a prominent figure in South African public life and a participant in the difficult work of building democratic institutions in the post-apartheid era. 4.    As you are aware, I raised the question of appropriate recognition by Parliament for the late Mr Lekota through the proper parliamentary forums. Unfortunately, the proposal that Parliament formally recognise his contribution was not supported. 5.    This outcome is difficult to reconcile with the precedent recently established when Parliament accorded significant institutional recognition to the late Dr Frene Ginwala, former Speaker of the National Assembly. Dr Ginwala was rightly honoured for the historic role she played as the presiding officer of the first democratically elected National Assembly during the formative years of South Africa’s constitutional democracy. 6.    In this regard, Mr Lekota’s position in the institutional history of Parliament is directly comparable. As the inaugural Chairperson of the NCOP, he presided over the second house of Parliament during the same foundational period of the first democratic administration. In institutional terms, the role he performed for the NCOP is equivalent to the role performed by Dr Ginwala in the National Assembly. It would therefore be difficult to justify why Parliament would recognise the contribution of one foundational presiding officer while declining to recognise the other. 7.    It would therefore be difficult to justify why a leader of Mr Lekota’s stature would not receive comparable institutional recognition. Any perception that recognition is withheld because he later occupied the opposition benches would be deeply unfortunate and would risk creating the impression that Parliament honours former leaders selectively. 8.    Parliament is an institution that must stand above party political divisions when recognising those who have contributed to the democratic project. Mr Lekota’s record of service to South Africa, and to Parliament itself, warrants acknowledgement in keeping with the precedent that has already been established. 9.    With the funeral of Mr Lekota scheduled to take place this coming Saturday, 14 March 2026 and I respectfully urge your office to reconsider this matter as a matter of urgency so that Parliament may act in a manner that reflects both institutional consistency and respect for the democratic legacy of the late Mr Lekota. Yours sincerely Mr NLS Kwankwa, MP Deputy President of the United Democratic Movement Party Leader in Parliament
09 Mar 2026
Request for parliamentary oversight regarding the handling of the UDM complaint to the SAHRC concerning SAFA and Coach Hugo Broos
Ms Thokozile Didiza, MP Speaker of the National Assembly Parliament of the Republic of South Africa PO Box 15 Cape Town 8000 Dear Madam Speaker Request for parliamentary oversight regarding the handling of the UDM complaint to the SAHRC concerning SAFA and Coach Hugo Broos 1.    I write to bring to your attention a matter that the United Democratic Movement (UDM) has formally referred to the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), and which has subsequently involved the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). The matter raises issues that fall within Parliament’s oversight responsibilities. 2.    In December 2025, the UDM lodged a complaint with the SAHRC concerning public utterances made by the Bafana Bafana coach, Mr Hugo Broos, as well as the institutional response of the South African Football Association (SAFA). The complaint concerns statements that raise allegations of racial and gender discrimination and therefore implicates constitutional rights protected under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA). 3.    On or about 10 or 11 December 2025, during a media engagement ahead of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations tournament, Mr Broos made remarks which were widely interpreted as racially and sexually insensitive. The comments prompted significant public concern and raised questions about equality, dignity and representation in South African sport. On 11 December 2025, the UDM formally lodged a complaint with the SAHRC citing both Mr Broos and SAFA as respondents. 4.    Subsequent to the public controversy, Mr Broos issued an apology on 15 December 2025, which the UDM accepted in good faith. However, the complaint lodged with the SAHRC was never confined to the conduct of one individual. It also raised broader concerns regarding the institutional response of SAFA and the absence of clear safeguards within sporting structures to address racism and sexism. The acceptance of an apology cannot substitute for institutional accountability where constitutional rights and systemic safeguards are concerned. For that reason, the UDM has consistently maintained that the matter requires consideration of systemic and policy reforms rather than being treated merely as an isolated incident. 5.    The complaint was initially raised by UDM Councillor Yongama Zigebe and was formally processed through the Office of the Acting Secretary General (ASG) of the UDM. During engagements in January 2026, the SAHRC informed the UDM that the CGE had also received related complaints and that the two institutions would coordinate their handling of the matter and pursue an independent mediation process as contemplated in PEPUDA. 6.    During that engagement and in subsequent written correspondence, the UDM requested clarity on several procedural issues, including whether a prima facie determination had been made that the conduct complained of falls within the ambit of PEPUDA, the anticipated timeline for the proposed mediation process, and the investigative steps undertaken by the SAHRC and CGE. 7.    Regrettably, follow up correspondence addressed to the SAHRC and CGE has not received any response. The continued absence of even a basic procedural update or acknowledgement is deeply concerning in a matter involving alleged violations of constitutional rights by a prominent national figure and questions of institutional accountability by a national sporting body. 8.    The UDM recognises that Chapter Nine institutions operate under significant resource and budgetary constraints. It is precisely because we respect their constitutional mandates and the important role they play in protecting fundamental rights that we have sought to allow the matter to proceed through the processes contemplated under PEPUDA. 9.    However, continued procedural uncertainty cannot be allowed to persist indefinitely. Where a complaint of this nature remains without visible procedural advancement or communication from the responsible institutions, it raises serious concerns regarding the responsiveness of the processes intended to safeguard constitutional rights. 10.    Should the situation remain unresolved, the UDM will have no option but to consider appropriate legal avenues to secure procedural clarity and advancement. Such a course would impose additional legal and financial burdens on all parties involved, including the SAHRC and CGE themselves. It is our sincere preference to avoid such an outcome and to allow the matter to be resolved within the existing constitutional framework. 11.    It has been suggested in some quarters that the UDM’s complaint was misplaced, that it risked undermining team morale, or that matters of equality should not be raised in the context of national sport. The UDM rejects this characterisation. The complaint was never directed at the Bafana Bafana team or its performance. It concerns statements made in a public capacity and the institutional response to those statements. Issues of equality, dignity and non-discrimination apply across all spheres of public life, including sport. Upholding these principles strengthens the integrity of our institutions and ensures that national teams represent the values of the Constitution as well as the pride of the country. 12.    In light of the procedural concerns outlined above, the UDM believes that parliamentary oversight is now both necessary and appropriate. 13.    Given the nature of the issues raised, the mandates of several parliamentary committees are directly engaged, namely: 13.1.    the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, which exercises oversight over the SAHRC; 13.2.    the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture, which exercises oversight over SAFA; 13.3.    the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities which exercises oversight over the CGE. 14.    The issues raised concern, among others, the protection of equality and dignity in public life, the responsiveness and functioning of Chapter Nine institutions tasked with safeguarding constitutional rights, and the governance and accountability standards expected of national sporting bodies that represent the country internationally. 15.    In the ordinary course of parliamentary oversight, the aforementioned committees may wish to satisfy themselves that the relevant constitutional institutions and entities have acted with the necessary responsiveness and procedural clarity in matters implicating equality, dignity and non-discrimination. 16.    In light of the above, we respectfully request that your Office take the following steps so that Parliament may exercise its oversight responsibilities: 16.1.    refer this matter to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development for consideration of the procedural handling of the complaint by the SAHRC; 16.2.    refer the matter to the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture for consideration of governance and accountability issues relating to the response of the SAFA; and 16.3.    refer the matter to the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities for consideration of the gender equality dimensions raised in the complaint and the role of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). Given the seriousness of the issues involved and the continuing absence of procedural clarity from the SAHRC and the CGE, we urge that this matter be treated with the urgency it warrants. 17.    The UDM stands ready to cooperate fully with your Office and with the relevant portfolio committees should Parliament consider it appropriate to engage further on this matter. Upon request, we would be willing to make available the correspondence exchanged with the SAHRC and the CGE, as well as any related documentation, so that the committees may be fully apprised of the procedural history of the complaint. 18.    The UDM remains committed to resolving this matter through lawful and constructive processes that uphold the Constitution and protect the dignity and equality of all South Africans. We are equally committed to the preservation and strengthening of our sporting codes and to the national pride that South Africans across race and gender place in our national teams. These are not competing ideals, but complementary ones that should guide the institutions entrusted with representing the nation. Yours sincerely Mr NLS Kwankwa, MP Deputy President of the United Democratic Movement Party Leader in Parliament Copied to:  •    Mr Xola Nqola, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development •    Mr Joseph McGluwa, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture •    Ms Liezl van der Merwe, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities •    Mr Tsietsi Shuping, Head of Department: Legal Services, Commission of Gender Equality •    Ms Zamantungwa Mbeki, Provincial Manager, South African Human Rights Commission •    Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP and UDM President •    Ms Zandile Phiri, UDM Acting Secretary General •    Ms Thandi Nontenja, MP, UDM National Treasurer and Chief Whip in the National Assembly •    Cllr Yongama Zigebe, originator of the HSRC complaint •    Ms Khazimla Ngalwa, Parliamentary Assistant to Mr Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, MP
40k+

Total Volunteer

23k+

Campaigns

35k+

Vote Paper

66k+

Coverage Area

Shorts Spotlight

Contribute For Us

Make A Donation For Your Country

The United Democratic Movement (UDM) has worked diligently to promote the interests of all South Africans over the years. Despite the challenges and stumbling blocks the party rose to the occasion and scored many political victories. Our successes are manifested in our public representation at various levels of government across the country, but also in the influence we have had irrespective of the ruling party’s parliamentary majority.

The UDM’s vision is to be “…the political home of all South Africans, united in the spirit of South Africanism by our common passion for our Country, mobilising the creative power inherent in our rich diversity, towards our transformation into a Winning Nation”.

Latest News & Articles

Illegal alcohol bust in Gugulethu exposes wider Western Cape alcohol crisis

Illegal alcohol bust in Gugulethu exposes wider Western Cape alcohol crisis

Statement by Ms Bulelwa Zondeka, Chairperson of the United Democratic Movement in the Western Cape The United Democratic Movement (UDM) in the Western Cape notes the arrest of five suspects following the reported discovery of an illegal alcohol manufacturing operation in Gugulethu, where police allegedly found chemicals, bottles, labels, packaging material and equipment used in the production of illicit alcohol. The UDM in the Western Cape welcomes this police action. Illegal and counterfeit alcohol is not a minor offence. It places lives at risk, avoids regulation, undermines lawful traders and feeds a wider alcohol economy that already causes serious damage in many Western Cape communities. This matter must not be treated as an isolated Gugulethu incident. Reports of counterfeit and illicit alcohol operations in areas such as Eerste River and Paarl show that illegal alcohol production and distribution in the province is organised, profitable and dangerous. These operations do not only break the law. They put unsafe products into communities that are already struggling with alcohol-related harm. The Western Cape has a long and painful relationship with alcohol misuse. The damage is visible in household poverty, domestic violence, road crashes, trauma units, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, school dropouts, crime and the weakening of family life. In many communities, alcohol abuse is not only a personal problem. It is tied to unemployment, despair, overcrowding, violence, poor access to treatment and the absence of safe social spaces, especially for young people. This is also a rural and farmworker issue. The old dop-system, where farmworkers were partly paid in alcohol, is illegal and may no longer exist in its crude historical form on most farms. However, the legacy of that system has not disappeared. Alcohol dependency, poverty, poor living conditions and the historic use of alcohol as a tool of control have left deep scars in many farming communities. The UDM in the Western Cape therefore calls for a serious provincial response that deals with both enforcement and social conditions. The South African Police Service, the Western Cape Liquor Authority, the South African Revenue Service, municipalities and health authorities must work together to trace illegal supply chains, shut down counterfeit operations, act against corrupt facilitation and protect communities from unsafe alcohol. At the same time, the Western Cape provincial government must confront the social roots of alcohol abuse. Poverty, unemployment, trauma, weak recreational facilities, poor access to rehabilitation services and the historic exploitation of farmworkers cannot be policed away. Communities need visible enforcement, but they also need treatment services, family support, youth programmes, safer public spaces and proper oversight of alcohol outlets. The UDM in the Western Cape further calls for a focused investigation into alcohol harm in farming communities, including whether any form of the dop-system, informal alcohol inducement or alcohol-linked labour control still exists. Farmworkers must not be trapped in conditions where poverty, dependency and substance abuse are normalised. The Gugulethu bust is a warning. The Western Cape cannot allow illegal alcohol factories, counterfeit alcohol networks, unregulated alcohol outlets and old patterns of exploitation to operate while communities carry the damage. Alcohol policy must protect people first, especially children, women, farmworkers and poor households who carry the heaviest burden.  

UDM in Mtubatuba conveys condolences on the passing of Councillor BP Mthiyane

UDM in Mtubatuba conveys condolences on the passing of Councillor BP Mthiyane

Statement by Remington Mazibuko, Councillor in the Inkosi Mtubatuba Local Municipality and UDM KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Chairperson The United Democratic Movement (UDM) in Mtubatuba extends its sincere condolences to the family, friends, colleagues and community of Councillor BP Mthiyane of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), Ward 21 councillor in the Inkosi Mtubatuba Local Municipality, following his passing last night. Councillor Mthiyane’s passing has come as a shock to many in the municipality. He was known as a humble man who cared about the people of Ward 21 and served his community with commitment. Although we served from different political parties, we shared the responsibility of serving the people of Mtubatuba. In local government, councillors are closest to residents, and the loss of a ward councillor is felt directly by the community that relied on him for representation, assistance and leadership. On behalf of the UDM in KwaZulu-Natal and Mtubatuba, I convey our condolences to Councillor Mthiyane’s family, the IFP, the Inkosi Mtubatuba Local Municipality, his fellow councillors and the residents of Ward 21. May his family find strength during this difficult time, and may his contribution to his community be remembered with respect.  

Boipatong neglect exposes national failure to protect South Africa’s heritage

Boipatong neglect exposes national failure to protect South Africa’s heritage

Statement by Bulelani Bobotyane, Secretary General of the United Democratic Movement The United Democratic Movement (UDM) notes with concern reports that the Boipatong Monument and Youth Heritage Centre in Vanderbijlpark has been neglected, despite public funding reportedly having been allocated for its upkeep and operation. This matter is not only about the reported R2.3 million. It points to a wider failure to maintain historical sites, museums, monuments, archives and community heritage facilities across South Africa. The Boipatong Monument honours the victims of the Boipatong Massacre of 17 June 1992, when 45 people were killed in one of the most painful events of the final years of apartheid. A site of this nature must not be allowed to decay because officials failed to maintain it, account for funds or manage its operations properly. However, this national problem is not limited to Struggle history. South Africa’s history is broad, layered and shared. It includes indigenous, cultural, colonial, military, labour, religious, scientific, artistic, community and liberation history. It also includes archaeological sites, museums, historic buildings, battlefields, graves, archives, libraries, memorials and places of community memory. When these places are neglected, the country loses more than buildings. It loses evidence, records, artefacts, oral histories, research material, local identity and opportunities for public education. This pattern can be seen in poorly maintained heritage sites, closed or underused museums, deteriorating historic buildings and community heritage centres that exist on paper but do not function properly. These are not isolated administrative problems. They point to a national failure of heritage governance. Museums and heritage sites are public institutions of memory, education and identity. They support research, tourism, local economic activity and cultural work, and give communities a place to record their own experiences. The UDM is disturbed by allegations that families of victims and survivors have had to clean and maintain the Boipatong site themselves. The reported failure to pay local artists and performers involved in heritage events also requires answers. Victims’ families and cultural workers should not be used to cover government failure. The UDM calls on the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture, provincial departments, municipalities and heritage agencies to provide a national account of publicly funded heritage sites that are closed, derelict, underused or without proper maintenance plans. This must include the condition of each site, the money allocated and spent, the responsible authority, the operational status, and the steps being taken to restore public access. The UDM further calls for consequence management where heritage funds have been wasted, misdirected or left without visible results. Heritage budgets cannot become another channel for failed projects, inflated contracts and ceremonial spending without proper maintenance. South Africa cannot speak about nation-building while allowing museums, archives, monuments, historic buildings and community heritage centres to deteriorate. The preservation of history is a public duty requiring maintenance, staffing, security, conservation, record-keeping, community involvement and honest reporting. This failure also reflects an imbalance in the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture. Sport is important and deserves support, but it cannot be elevated to near-sacred status while arts, culture, heritage, museums, archives and community history are left to decay. A country’s identity is not built on stadiums and tournaments alone. It is also built through language, memory, artefacts, performances, historic buildings, artists, cultural workers and the places that tell communities who they are. Boipatong must be treated as part of a national problem. South Africa needs a clear heritage infrastructure recovery plan that covers all forms of heritage and restores public access to sites that have been allowed to fail.  

Kouga sewage pollution: residents need results, not paper compliance

Kouga sewage pollution: residents need results, not paper compliance

Statement by Mr Chris Mtyaleka, UDM Eastern Cape Provincial Fundraiser and Jeffreys Bay resident The United Democratic Movement (UDM) in Jeffreys Bay notes with serious concern the continued allegations of sewage pollution affecting Jeffreys Bay, KwaNomzamo, Humansdorp and the Seekoei Estuary. This is not a distant administrative matter. It affects residents directly. It concerns public health, the safety of beaches, the protection of the environment, local businesses, tourism, and the credibility of the Kouga Local Municipality. The Public Protector’s report, dated 29 September 2025, found that the allegation that the Kouga Local Municipality had failed to properly maintain the Jeffreys Bay and KwaNomzamo wastewater treatment works was substantiated. That finding cannot be answered with public relations language, technical excuses or vague promises of future improvement. This matter did not begin yesterday. The complaint reportedly dates back to 2019, while residents and activists have alleged that people have been exposed to contaminated water in the Seekoei Estuary since around 2016. That means this community has lived with sewage-related risk for years. The municipality now says that an implementation plan requested by the Public Protector in September 2025 has been tabled before council, approved, and is being implemented. That may be the municipality’s position, but the real test is whether sewage spills stop, whether the wastewater treatment works function properly, whether water quality is safe, and whether residents receive honest and timeous information. By July 2026, residents are entitled to ask what has actually changed since the Public Protector’s report. They are entitled to know what work has been completed, what remains outstanding, what deadlines apply, and who is responsible for delivery. The UDM in Jeffreys Bay is concerned that residents, activists and affected communities have had to raise these issues over several years before meaningful action became visible. No municipality should wait for repeated complaints, media attention or formal findings before maintaining wastewater infrastructure, protecting public health and safeguarding the environment. Jeffreys Bay is a residential area, a tourism destination, an economic asset and part of South Africa’s coastal heritage. Pollution of beaches and estuaries damages public confidence, affects local businesses, threatens livelihoods and places residents at unnecessary risk. The UDM in Jeffreys Bay calls on the Kouga Local Municipality to urgently publish a clear progress report on the implementation of the Public Protector’s remedial action. The report must explain what has been done since 29 September 2025, what remains outstanding, what budget has been allocated, and when residents can expect verifiable improvement. The municipality must also provide regular public updates on water quality testing, sewage spills, beach or estuary closures, and any public health risks. These updates must be factual, accessible and consistent. Residents should not have to rely on rumours, social media posts or activist monitoring to know whether their environment is safe. The UDM in Jeffreys Bay further calls on the Eastern Cape Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism to ensure that its investigation is properly concluded, and that any failures by the municipality, officials, contractors or service providers are acted upon. The people of Jeffreys Bay, KwaNomzamo, Humansdorp and surrounding communities deserve clean water, safe beaches, functioning wastewater treatment works and straight answers from those responsible. The UDM in Jeffreys Bay will continue to press for measurable remedial action, public reporting and proper accountability from the Kouga Local Municipality and all responsible authorities. Consistent. UDM. Present. Accountable. Local government that works.  

Stay Conencted