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

UDM mourns the loss of two SANDF members and condemns the scourge of illegal mining

UDM mourns the loss of two SANDF members and condemns the scourge of illegal mining

Statement by President of the United Democratic Movement, Deputy Minister Bantu Holomisa, MP  The United Democratic Movement and our President, Major General (Ret) Bantu Holomisa, extend our heartfelt condolences to the families, loved ones and colleagues of the two South African National Defence Force (SANDF) members who tragically lost their lives after falling into an abandoned mineshaft during an operation against illegal mining. We also convey our deepest sympathies to the Chief of the SANDF, the broader defence community and all those mourning this devastating loss. The deaths of these two soldiers are a painful reminder of the dangers faced by the men and women entrusted with serving and protecting the Republic. Their dedication and sacrifice in the service of South Africa will not be forgotten. This tragedy also draws renewed attention to the serious dangers associated with illegal mining and the continued existence of unsecured and abandoned mine shafts across the country. Illegal mining is not a victimless crime. It endangers surrounding communities, undermines the rule of law, damages the environment and enables organised criminal networks. It also exposes members of the SANDF, the South African Police Service and other security personnel to extremely hazardous conditions. The UDM strongly condemns illegal mining and the criminal syndicates that organise, finance and profit from it. These networks must be identified, investigated and dismantled through coordinated and sustained law enforcement action. The UDM calls for a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding this tragic incident and urges all relevant authorities to accelerate efforts to identify, secure and rehabilitate abandoned mineshafts to prevent further loss of life among security personnel and civilians alike. Greater cooperation is required between mining companies and the departments responsible for mineral resources, defence, policing, local government and environmental management. Mining companies must also be held accountable for properly securing and rehabilitating disused mining infrastructure. South Africa cannot allow abandoned mineshafts to remain accessible to criminal enterprises while posing a continuing danger to communities and those entrusted with enforcing the law. The UDM honours the memory of the two fallen soldiers and extends its support and deepest sympathies to their families, the SANDF and the entire defence community during this time of grief. May their courage, dedication and sacrifice continue to inspire all South Africans. May their souls rest in eternal peace.

Nelson Mandela Day must be a call to service, honesty and responsibility

Nelson Mandela Day must be a call to service, honesty and responsibility

Statement by Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, MP, UDM Deputy President and Leader in Parliament As South Africa observes Nelson Mandela International Day on 18 July 2026, we remember former President Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela with the respect due to a departed elder and former Head of State. Nelson Mandela Day should, however, be more than an annual exercise in praise or symbolism. It should be a call to service, reflection and honest engagement with the condition of our country. President Mandela’s legacy remains the subject of two broad schools of thought. Many South Africans regard him as a central figure in the struggle against apartheid, a leader who helped guide the country through a dangerous political transition and who contributed to the establishment of a democratic constitutional order. Others believe that the political settlement reached during that period did not sufficiently transform the economic structure of the country, and that too many of the inequalities created under apartheid were allowed to continue. For many black South Africans who remain landless, unemployed, poor and excluded from economic opportunity, these concerns are neither abstract nor disrespectful. They arise from the realities of their daily lives. A mature democracy must be able to acknowledge both perspectives. We should neither dismiss President Mandela’s contribution nor pretend that the democratic transition resolved the structural injustices that continue to confront our people. United Democratic Movement (UDM) President Bantu Holomisa shared a deep relationship of trust with President Mandela. That relationship was built during a difficult period in our country’s history and was founded on frank engagement, mutual respect and a shared concern for South Africa’s future.  Respect for President Mandela’s memory must therefore include the honesty that characterised relationships of that nature, rather than reducing his life and legacy to empty ceremony. Nelson Mandela Day should remind those who hold public office that leadership is not about personal enrichment, privilege or public performance. It is about service, integrity and responsibility to the people. South Africa continues to face deep poverty, unemployment, inequality, failing public services, crime and widespread disillusionment with political leadership. These conditions cannot be addressed through 67 minutes of activity once a year. They require sustained work, accountable government and the courage to confront the unfinished business of our democracy. The UDM calls upon South Africans to use this day to serve their communities, assist the vulnerable, care for the elderly, support young people and contribute to the restoration of dignity in the places where they live. As we remember President Mandela, may we do so respectfully, honestly and without mythmaking. May his soul continue to rest in peace, and may Nelson Mandela Day inspire a renewed commitment to building a just, equal and accountable South Africa.

UDM in UThukela conveys condolences to the Mahlaba family and ANC in KwaZulu-Natal

UDM in UThukela conveys condolences to the Mahlaba family and ANC in KwaZulu-Natal

Statement by Mr Dumisani Khumalo, UDM National Deputy Organiser and Chairperson of the United Democratic Movement in the UThukela Region The United Democratic Movement in the UThukela Region has received with sadness the news of the sudden passing of Dr Ntuthuko Mahlaba, an African National Congress (ANC) Provincial Task Team member in KwaZulu-Natal, a Member of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Legislature, and former Mayor of the Newcastle Local Municipality. Dr Mahlaba reportedly died after a vehicle knocked him down while he was jogging in Newcastle on Saturday morning. Reports further indicate that the police are investigating a case of culpable homicide following his death. On behalf of the UDM in the UThukela Region, I extend sincere condolences to Dr Mahlaba’s wife, children, family, friends, colleagues, the ANC in KwaZulu-Natal, and the communities who knew and worked with him. Dr Mahlaba’s passing is a tragic loss. He was taken before his time, at an age when he still had much to offer his family, his community and public life in KwaZulu-Natal. No family should have to face such a sudden and painful loss, and our thoughts are with those closest to him as they come to terms with this tragedy. The UDM in the UThukela Region further notes that, in KwaZulu-Natal, any sudden death of a political figure lands in a province with a deeply painful and tragic history of political violence, intimidation and political killings. This is not to prejudge the circumstances of Dr Mahlaba’s death, which are for the police to investigate. It is to recognise the hurt, fear and painful memories that such news can awaken in communities that have lived through political bloodshed for many years. At a moment such as this, politics must give way to humanity. KwaZulu-Natal has known too much political violence and too many political killings. While no one should speculate about the circumstances of Dr Mahlaba’s death, the matter must be investigated thoroughly, transparently and without delay. His family and the public deserve clarity, and his passing must not be reduced to rumour, factional talk or political point-scoring. The UDM in the UThukela Region joins the people of Newcastle, Amajuba, UThukela and KwaZulu-Natal in mourning this sudden loss. May Dr Mahlaba’s family find strength during this difficult time, and may his soul rest in peace.

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.  

Stay Conencted