Walkouts and accusations plague South Africa’s 'unity' Dialogue

Key topics:Legacy foundations, DA, and others withdraw citing government dominanceSolidarity and AfriForum accuse ANC of turning talks into monologueGOOD Party urges patience, accuses DA of political theatreSign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here..By Kerry Lanaghan.South Africa’s long-awaited National Dialogue, billed as a “generational opportunity” to rebuild trust and chart a shared future, is faltering under political rifts, accusations of bad faith, and disputes over control and purpose.In recent weeks, an array of prominent actors - from legacy foundations honouring the country’s most revered leaders, to the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Labour Party - have withdrawn from the process, citing deep flaws in its structure and execution. Others, like the GOOD Party, urge participants to hold their nerves and see the Dialogue through.The first National Convention, set for 15-16 August at UNISA in Pretoria, has become a lightning rod for controversy. Critics question its legitimacy, price tag - estimated at between R700 million and R740 million - and increasing tilt towards government control.Foundations pull out over process concernsThe Thabo Mbeki Foundation, Steve Biko Foundation, Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation, Desmond & Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation, FW de Klerk Foundation, and the Strategic Dialogue Group announced they could not endorse the current structure and timeline. While reaffirming support for the broader National Dialogue project, they called for the convention postponed until after 15 October to allow “adequate preparation, coherence and participatory integrity.”According to their statement, what began as a citizen-led initiative has shifted towards government control, undermining meaningful engagement. They cited a rushed timetable, poor planning, and limited interactive design as reasons they could not “lend their names” to the gathering.Funding delays compounded their concerns, with one insider confirming that a promised funds transfer was only secured at the eleventh hour - too late for proper preparation. They warned that this urgency encouraged “emergency procurement” that could breach the Public Finance Management Act.Labour Party accuses foundations of hypocrisyThe Labour Party, which had earlier taken the Dialogue to court in an attempt to halt it pending a constitutional review, seized on the foundations' withdrawal as proof of duplicity. Leader Mathunjwa accused them of defending the process in court “to sing for their supper,” only to abandon it when “the gravy train” slowed.He lambasted the Dialogue as an “illegitimate gathering” staged in luxury venues, facilitated by elites out of touch with ordinary South Africans. The Labour Party maintains that any genuine national conversation must include constitutional reform, a referendum, and a new electoral system - measures they say are absent from the current plan.DA quits over ANC’s ‘double standards’The DA’s withdrawal came with a blistering critique from leader John Steenhuisen, who accused President Cyril Ramaphosa and the ANC of repeatedly violating the Government of National Unity’s Statement of Intent. He cited removing a DA deputy minister over a minor procedural lapse, while ANC ministers facing serious corruption allegations remain in office.Steenhuisen dismissed the Dialogue as an ANC-run “electioneering ploy” with no constitutional authority, saying it was designed to distract from the ruling party’s failures. The DA plans to mobilise civil society against the process and will vote against departmental budgets led by ministers accused of corruption until they are removed.Solidarity and AfriForum join boycott, cite ANC ‘hijacking’Adding to the chorus of withdrawals, the Solidarity Movement, AfriForum, and trade union Solidarity announced they would also boycott the opening convention, accusing the ANC of hijacking what was meant to be a citizen-led process. While stressing their support for genuine dialogue, Solidarity chairperson Flip Buys said all signs pointed to “fruitless discussions instead of action,” driven by the ANC’s desire to regain political ground rather than solve crises. AfriForum chief executive Kallie Kriel warned the event had degenerated into a “government-driven national monologue” and dismissed the presidency’s handling of concerns raised by former leaders’ foundations as proof of bad faith. The organisations said they would instead focus on grassroots, community-led dialogues and partnerships with cultural and civil society groups. They argued that the party responsible for South Africa’s decline could not credibly lead the search for solutions.GOOD Party urges participants to stay the courseIn stark contrast, the GOOD Party condemned the DA’s exit as political theatre. Secretary-General Brett Herron said South Africa needed leadership to manage disagreements and engage constructively, not “frequent tantrums.”Herron argued that the DA’s stance was inconsistent - withdrawing from the Dialogue while retaining positions in the GNU - and accused the party of selective outrage, noting that it kept Cape Town officials in office despite corruption probes. He acknowledged the cabinet was too large but defended it as a necessary product of coalition governance that reflects the country’s political diversity.A fractured ‘generational opportunityThe National Dialogue was envisioned as an inclusive process to bring together political parties, civil society, and citizens in pursuit of solutions to South Africa’s deep economic and social crises. Yet, disagreements over governance, scope, and intent have fractured the coalition of actors needed to sustain it.The walkouts by major stakeholders underscore a central tension: whether the Dialogue can still be a platform for genuine citizen engagement or has already been subsumed by the political manoeuvring it was meant to transcend.With the Presidency pressing ahead despite withdrawals, the convention will likely proceed, but its credibility hangs in the balance. The foundations’ call for 13,664 community and sectoral engagements and 50,000 citizen-led dialogues starkly contrasts with the current two-day programme.Whether the National Dialogue emerges as a catalyst for reform or a cautionary tale of missed opportunity may depend less on the number of attendees in Pretoria this week and more on whether South Africa’s political class can put unity of purpose above point-scoring - a prospect that seems increasingly uncertain at present.

Walkouts and accusations plague South Africa’s 'unity' Dialogue

Related Stories

Hersov: There are two South Africas — it's time Washington started treating them differently

The sleep tracker dilemma: Good technology, unintended consequences

Rob Hersov: The Mafube template - saving SA one municipality at a time

Afrimat’s 20-year milestone: Digging into the good, the bad, and the resilient for Ricardo Portfolio investors