Holomisa warns ANC’s Parliament ‘study groups’ resemble state capture, corruption

UDM leader Bantu Holomisa has warned that the ANC’s Parliament “study groups” are corrupt and a form of state capture.

• UDM leader Bantu Holomisa has raised concerns about the ANC’s “study groups,” saying that they undermine democratic governance and promote state capture.
• Holomisa claims the secret meetings bypass formal parliamentary processes, compromising oversight and undermining the separation of powers.
• He urged Parliament and the Public Service Commission to investigate and prohibit such practices, warning against their impact on accountability and governance integrity.

UDM president Bantu Holomisa has sent an SOS to National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza and Public Service Commission chairperson Somadoda Fikeni about what he fears is a form of state capture in the ANC’s Parliament “study groups”.

Holomisa, who is also the Deputy Minister of Defence, penned the letter on 1 April, and copied in President Cyril Ramaphosa, Deputy President Paul Mashatile and leaders of parties in the government of national unity (GNU).

He expressed concern about the “study groups”, where directors-general and senior security personnel are called to engage with ANC MPs in “secret meetings” outside of formal parliamentary processes.

“These secret meetings are the ones which are the cause of state capture, no doubt,” he wrote.

READ | Gwarube wants SIU to conduct lifestyle audits of senior officials

The “study groups”, he said, were inherited into the GNU, and were “problematic” because not only were other political parties left out or not privy to discussions, but they undermined the separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and administration.

“Firstly, it creates an uneven playing field within the GNU itself. Not all political parties have equal access to these “study groups,” thereby entrenching historical imbalances and undermining the very spirit of inclusivity and fairness that the GNU seeks to promote. It is a continuation of a political culture that predates the GNU and has no place in a democratic dispensation committed to transparency and accountability.

“Secondly, and more fundamentally, it undermines the doctrine of separation between the executive, the legislature, and the administration. Members of Parliament are constitutionally mandated to exercise oversight over the executive and the public service.

“The erosion of these constitutional safeguards is not a procedural lapse; it is a fundamental threat to democratic governance. This behaviour truly reminds me of the Matanzima era [of the former prime minister of Transkei, Kaiser Matanzima], where political directives laced with corruption were issued [to] the detriment of service delivery,“ wrote Holomisa.

He added that the “study groups” were in clear violation of the GNU’s recent resolution on the public service, which mandates its depoliticisation.

In the letter, Holomisa also said the so-called “study groups” had the potential to weaken and compromise the oversight role Parliament ought to play.

“The existence and operation of these informal ‘study groups’ must therefore be understood within that very context; they create conditions in which oversight is diluted, relationships are cultivated outside formal accountability structures, and Parliament’s constitutional role is undermined.

“They effectively establish parallel and informal centres of influence that bypass the constitutionally mandated processes, thereby weakening institutional integrity and collapsing the very checks and balances that are meant to guard against abuse of power,“ he wrote.

He added:

He also warned that the practice had a direct and damaging impact on discipline within departments, with ministers and their deputies rendered ineffective when officials circumvented them by seeking protection or influence through Parliament.

“What is emerging is not merely administrative weakness but a deliberate and coordinated subversion of governance processes. Officials who are entrusted with implementing policy are now actively organising to resist accountability, using political channels as shields against consequence.

This represents a dangerous inversion of the constitutional order, where those meant to be held accountable are instead manipulating the very institutions meant to hold them to account.

“Equally troubling is the growing normalisation of this conduct. If left unchallenged, it risks entrenching a parallel system of governance where informal influence supersedes lawful authority, and where decisions are no longer taken in the public interest but in the service of factional and personal agendas. This is how institutions are hollowed out, not abruptly, but systematically and with calculated intent. It signals a gradual but deliberate collapse of the constitutional checks and balances that are essential to sustaining a functional democracy.

READ | FF+, DA butt heads after ANC retains NMB mayoral seat in the absence of 7 DA councillors

“Let it be stated without equivocation that any member of Parliament who participates in or enables such practices is complicit in the erosion of democratic oversight. Parliament cannot claim to be a guardian of accountability while elements within it are actively undermining that very mandate.

“Silence or inaction in the face of this conduct amounts to tacit endorsement. This complicity, whether active or passive, constitutes a betrayal of the constitutional oath taken by public representatives to uphold and protect the Constitution.”

Holomisa called on Didiza to ensure that Parliament prohibited and investigated “any informal or irregular platforms that compromise the independence and objectivity of members of Parliament”, and called on the PSC to exercise its constitutional mandate by investigating the involvement of public servants in such “study groups” and the issuance of clear directives prohibiting participation in any processes blurring the line between administration and political structures.