Mzwanele Nyhontso to take legal action against Phakel’umthakathi over viral land reform claims
South Africa’s already combustible debate around land reform has taken a sharp legal turn, after the Ministry of Land Reform and Rural Development confirmed it is preparing to take legal action against activist and Amabutho leader Nkosikhona Ndabandaba, widely known as “Phakel’umthakathi”.
At the centre of the dispute are a series of public allegations made by Ndabandaba on social media and during a podcast appearance, which the Ministry says cross the line from political criticism into defamatory claims that damage both institutional credibility and public trust.
The allegations, which have been widely circulated online, accuse Minister Mzwanele Nyhontso and his department of involvement in the abuse of Black people on farms, forced evictions of Black families, and the alleged transfer of land to white farmers.
The Ministry has strongly rejected all claims, describing them as false, unfounded and harmful.
In a statement attributed to the department and seen circulating on social media, officials warned that the allegations are not supported by evidence and risk undermining public confidence in ongoing land reform programmes.
“These claims are not supported by evidence and have the potential to mislead the public, harm the reputation of the Minister and the department, and undermine confidence in the important work being undertaken to advance land reform, tenure security, restitution, and rural development,” the statement read.
While reaffirming constitutional protections for freedom of expression, the Ministry drew a clear line, arguing that such rights do not extend to the publication of defamatory material.
“The Ministry respects the right of all South Africans to freedom of expression and public accountability. However, this right does not extend to the publication of false and defamatory statements that damage personal and institutional integrity,” it said.
According to the statement, Nyhontso has now instructed legal representatives to begin appropriate proceedings against Ndabandaba. The Ministry says the move is aimed at protecting both the Minister’s reputation and the integrity of the department’s mandate.
“These steps are intended to protect the integrity of the Minister, the department, and the broader public mandate entrusted to the Ministry,” it added.
Despite the escalating legal response, the Ministry insists its focus remains on land reform, restitution, and rural development, describing these as constitutional priorities central to redressing South Africa’s historical inequalities.
However, the legal escalation comes against a backdrop of increasingly heated public rhetoric.
Nyhontso has previously referred to Ndabandaba and his ally Ngizwe Mchunu as “thugs”, comments that further inflamed tensions between government officials and nationalist-leaning activist movements.
The Minister has also taken aim at anti-immigration narratives gaining traction in certain activist circles, arguing that colonial borders artificially divided African communities and that no African should be treated as a foreigner on the continent.
He has criticised the framing of migration debates in South Africa, suggesting that they disproportionately target Black African migrants while overlooking undocumented individuals from other regions.
Ndabandaba, however, has pushed back forcefully. Responding to the Minister’s earlier remarks, he dismissed Nyhontso’s comments as “stupid” and defended his campaign as lawful and rights-based rather than politically motivated or violent.
A prominent activist and actor, Ndabandaba has led a series of nationwide marches targeting businesses accused of employing undocumented foreign nationals. He has also issued a controversial deadline of 30 June 2026 for undocumented migrants to leave South Africa, a position that has drawn both support and fierce criticism across political and civil society lines.
Following the Minister’s “thugs” remark, Ndabandaba and his team reiterated that their actions are aimed at pressuring government to enforce existing immigration and labour laws, not to seize political power or incite violence.
They maintain that their campaign is rooted in accountability and enforcement rather than extremism, even as critics warn it risks deepening social divisions.
As the matter now moves towards the courts, the case underscores a broader national tension: the collision between activist-driven populism, government policy on land reform, and the increasingly volatile space of public political discourse in South Africa.
