New Security Laws – The political scene in South Africa reached a boiling point in June 2025 as Parliament turned into a battleground for the African National Congress (ANC), Democratic Alliance (DA), and Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) over controversial new security laws. The heated exchanges and sharp divisions between these major political parties have dominated headlines, sparking widespread public interest and concern. The proposed legislation, intended to overhaul the national security framework, has been criticized for its broad powers and lack of accountability mechanisms. The ANC, South Africa’s ruling party, argues that the new security laws are essential to address rising crime, cyber threats, and terrorism. Meanwhile, the DA and EFF claim the legislation poses a direct threat to constitutional rights, civil liberties, and democratic transparency. The parliamentary debate quickly descended into chaos, with members of the opposition staging walkouts, chanting protests, and accusing the ANC of authoritarianism. The country now stands at a political crossroads. Citizens, analysts, and legal experts are calling for clarity, oversight, and a balanced approach that ensures national safety without compromising personal freedoms. In this article, we unpack the major points of contention, the positions of each party, the specifics of the proposed laws, and what South Africans can expect in the coming months.
Overview of the Proposed New Security Laws
The new security bills were introduced by the ANC-led government to strengthen state intelligence, national surveillance, and emergency response protocols. Critics argue that these powers could be misused.
- Broader surveillance powers granted to intelligence agencies
- Mandatory data retention by telecoms and ISPs
- Redefinition of national security threats to include social unrest and cyber dissent
- Emergency power provisions allowing government shutdowns of communication networks
- Expansion of the Intelligence Oversight Committee with limited opposition participation
- Criminalization of unauthorized reporting on national security matters
- More discretion to the Minister of Police and State Security
- Vague definitions of “threats to national interest” and “anti-state activity”
Breakdown of New Security Laws
Each clause of the bill has sparked fierce criticism from civil society groups and opposition leaders who fear a slide into authoritarianism.
- Clause 6: Allows bulk data collection without a warrant
- Clause 9: Imposes a 10-year jail term for whistleblowing on classified issues
- Clause 12: Permits armed forces deployment during “information crises”
- Clause 15: Authorizes real-time surveillance of social media platforms
- Clause 19: Enables blocking of mobile signals during protests
- Clause 21: Limits media reporting on active intelligence operations
- Clause 27: Defines dissent as “intentional destabilization”
- Clause 30: Restricts access to Parliament records on security discussions
New Security Laws – ANC’s Position and Justification
The ANC argues that the legislation is a response to recent instability and cyber threats. They claim the country needs a proactive approach to security.
- Recent increase in organized crime and cyberattacks
- Ongoing economic sabotage and vandalism of national infrastructure
- ANC says laws mirror international practices in the EU and US
- Party frames it as a “patriotic safeguard” for public safety
- Claims opposition is politicizing security for election mileage
New Security Laws – Official ANC Response in Parliament
ANC representatives presented a united front in Parliament. They emphasized the urgency of modernizing outdated security frameworks.
- Minister of State Security: “We cannot protect our people with obsolete laws.”
- Chief Whip of ANC: “We will not allow lawlessness disguised as freedom.”
- ANC MPs: “This bill is about South African sovereignty, not surveillance.”
New Security Laws – DA and EFF’s Objections and Counter-Proposals
The DA and EFF, despite ideological differences, joined forces to oppose what they call “draconian” laws that infringe on basic freedoms.
- DA says bill undermines judicial checks and privacy
- EFF claims the laws criminalize protest and black radical voices
- Both parties call for a redraft with stronger oversight mechanisms
- Proposals include mandatory court approval for surveillance
- Push for inclusion of civil society in the Intelligence Oversight Committee
Highlights from the Heated Debate
Parliament saw some of its most tense moments in recent history. Verbal clashes and near-physical confrontations made national news.
- EFF MPs chanted “No to dictatorship!” during the ANC’s speech
- DA MPs walked out in protest, calling it a “constitutional betrayal”
- Speaker temporarily suspended the session amid rising tensions
- Accusations of “ANC power grab” echoed throughout the opposition benches
Civil Society and Legal Expert Responses
Civil society organizations and constitutional experts have weighed in with grave concerns, stating that several clauses may be unconstitutional.
- Freedom Under Law: “This bill is a democracy’s nightmare.”
- Right2Know Campaign: “It revives apartheid-era surveillance tactics.”
- Legal experts say clauses violate Section 14 and 16 of the Constitution
- Calls for urgent intervention from the Constitutional Court
- Public submissions to Parliament received over 25,000 objections
Potential Constitutional Conflicts
Legal scholars have identified multiple areas where the bill conflicts with South Africa’s supreme law.
- Section 14: Right to privacy (violated by surveillance without warrant)
- Section 16: Freedom of expression (limited by media gag clauses)
- Section 17: Freedom of assembly (restricted by protest control powers)
- Section 32: Right to access information (limited by clause 30)
- Section 34: Right to fair hearing (risk of abuse in emergency arrests)
What Happens Next: Political and Legal Roadmap
The bill has passed its first reading but still faces hurdles before becoming law. The political timeline is critical for its fate.
- June 15: Second reading scheduled in Parliament
- June 20: Constitutional Review Committee to hold hearings
- June 30: Final vote planned before winter recess
- July 5: Possible legal challenge in Constitutional Court by opposition
- August: Expected ruling from court if case is accepted
Possible Scenarios Ahead
There are several directions this issue could take, depending on legal rulings and public pressure.
- Scenario 1: Bill is amended and passed with compromise clauses
- Scenario 2: Bill is rejected after Constitutional Court intervention
- Scenario 3: Bill passes unchanged, triggering nationwide protests
- Scenario 4: Coalition between DA, EFF, and civil society delays final vote
The Bigger Picture: Democracy, Power, and Rights
The drama unfolding in Parliament has once again highlighted the tensions between state power and individual rights in South Africa’s post-apartheid democracy.
If passed without major amendments, the laws could reshape how dissent, privacy, and journalism operate in the country. With elections looming in 2026, parties are using this debate to solidify their stance with the public, particularly the youth and middle-class voters.
While the ANC insists the laws are necessary for safety, opposition leaders warn they are setting a dangerous precedent that may return the country to an era of censorship and unchecked authority.
South Africans across all walks of life are encouraged to participate in public commentary and demand transparency before the laws are finalized.
Major Political Reactions to the Security Laws
| Political Party | Position on Bill | Key Objection/Support Point | Action Taken in Parliament |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANC | Supportive | Bill ensures modern national security protocols | Pushed for urgent reading schedule |
| DA | Opposed | Undermines privacy and judicial oversight | Walked out of debate |
| EFF | Strongly Opposed | Criminalizes dissent and protests | Disrupted session with protests |
| IFP | Cautiously Opposed | Wants more clarity on specific clauses | Requested detailed review |
| UDM | Neutral | Awaiting public input and committee feedback | No formal position yet |
| Freedom Front+ | Opposed | Clauses echo apartheid surveillance laws | Demanded withdrawal of bill |
| ACDP | Opposed | Violates moral and ethical principles | Submitted formal objection |
| COPE | Divided | Some support ANC’s view, others side with opposition | Internal consultations ongoing |
Timeline of Events – Security Bill 2025
| Date | Event/Action | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| May 12 | ANC tables draft security bill | Sparks immediate backlash |
| May 18 | Public hearing opens | Receives 25,000+ submissions |
| May 25 | First reading in Parliament | Bill provisionally approved |
| June 5 | Parliamentary debate erupts | Session disrupted by EFF and DA walkout |
| June 15 | Second reading scheduled | Tensions expected to intensify |
| June 20 | Committee reviews constitutional concerns | Legal experts invited to testify |
| June 30 | Final vote expected before winter recess | Outcome remains uncertain |
| July 5 | Constitutional Court challenge likely | Civil rights groups preparing legal arguments |
The security law debate marks a defining moment for South Africa’s democracy. As Parliament inches closer to a final decision, public engagement and constitutional fidelity will determine whether the country upholds the values of freedom or slides toward centralized control.
FAQs – ANC, DA, and EFF Parliament Clash Over Security Bill
Q1: What is the main concern with the new security laws?
The primary concern is that the laws give the government excessive surveillance powers without sufficient judicial oversight or public accountability.
Q2: Who supports and who opposes the bill?
The ANC supports the bill, while the DA, EFF, and most civil society groups are strongly opposed.
Q3: Will the bill become law immediately?
No. It must still pass a second reading, committee review, final vote, and possible Constitutional Court scrutiny.
Q4: Can these laws affect ordinary citizens?
Yes. If passed, the laws could impact privacy, access to information, and rights to protest and free expression.
Q5: What can citizens do to oppose the bill?
Submit comments during the public consultation process, support civil society campaigns, and pressure MPs to reject the bill.