March and March-AfriForum alliance raises political motive questions as the two organisations move towards cooperation on legal matters, crime prevention and the rule of law, despite clear ideological differences.

The meeting between March and March leader Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma and AfriForum CEO Kallie Kriel has attracted attention across South Africa, particularly because of the organisations’ different political backgrounds and approaches.

The groups say their cooperation is focused on practical community issues rather than political alignment. However, political analysts have questioned whether the relationship could have wider implications for South Africa’s political landscape.

March and March and AfriForum agree to cooperate

March and March and AfriForum confirmed that they intend to work together on legal matters of mutual interest. Their discussions included the protection of the rule of law, fighting crime and addressing concerns around illegal immigration.

The organisations also discussed challenges affecting communities, including border control, illicit trade, crime and weaknesses within the public education system.

Ngobese-Zuma said the partnership would allow communities to develop mechanisms to hold government accountable while ensuring that the law is applied fairly.

She has also positioned March and March as a movement concerned with issues affecting South African citizens, particularly unemployment, crime and immigration.

The movement’s decision to engage with AfriForum comes shortly after Ngobese-Zuma announced the SA First Forum, which she described as a social justice litigation organisation intended to provide legal support to South Africans who cannot afford it.

She previously said the initiative would effectively seek to become an “AfriForum for black South Africans”.

That statement makes the latest cooperation particularly significant because AfriForum has traditionally focused heavily on Afrikaner and minority rights.

AfriForum alliance raises political questions

The AfriForum alliance with March and March has inevitably raised questions about whether the cooperation could eventually develop beyond legal and community matters.

Both organisations insist that their relationship does not mean they agree on every issue.

Kriel said organisations could cooperate in areas where they share common interests without abandoning their differences on other matters.

For AfriForum, cooperation with March and March could provide an opportunity to expand its engagement with communities outside its traditional support base.

For March and March, working with an established civil rights organisation could provide access to legal experience, research capabilities and organisational knowledge.

Kriel said AfriForum was prepared to share lessons from its two decades of organisational development with March and March.

The partnership therefore appears to have a practical component, with both sides potentially gaining resources and experience from the relationship.

However, the political implications remain difficult to ignore.

South African political motives under scrutiny

The South African political motives behind the engagement have been questioned by political analysts because of the broader opposition to the government expressed by both March and March and other political groups that have engaged with AfriForum.

University of Limpopo political analyst Professor Metji Makgoba described the meeting as unusual, arguing that March and March and AfriForum have ideological differences that could make the partnership complicated.

Makgoba questioned why March and March would cooperate with an organisation he criticised strongly over its political positions.

He also raised concerns that March and March could potentially be drawn into political objectives that differ from its stated focus on South African communities.

However, these are political assessments rather than established facts, and the organisations themselves have said their cooperation is based on areas of shared interest.

That distinction is important.

A political partnership has not been formally announced. Instead, the organisations have agreed to cooperate on selected legal and community issues.

Rule of law becomes common ground

The rule of law appears to be one of the strongest areas of agreement between the organisations.

March and March has repeatedly criticised the government over crime, border management and illegal immigration.

AfriForum has similarly used legal action and advocacy to challenge government policies and decisions.

This creates an area where the two organisations can potentially work together without necessarily agreeing on their broader political philosophies.

Ngobese-Zuma said the movement wanted communities to work together to hold government accountable.

She argued that weak border controls contribute to economic problems, illicit trade and insecurity.

The organisation has also linked illegal immigration to concerns about employment, crime and pressure on public services.

Those arguments have made immigration one of the most prominent issues associated with March and March.

Illegal immigration South Africa debate

The issue of illegal immigration South Africa remains politically sensitive.

March and March has adopted a strong position on undocumented migration, while AfriForum has also raised concerns about border management and the enforcement of immigration laws.

Their cooperation could therefore create a stronger civil society voice around immigration enforcement.

However, critics have warned that discussions around immigration must distinguish between undocumented migration, criminal activity and the rights of people living in South Africa.

The rule of law applies to citizens and non-citizens alike, meaning enforcement must take place within the Constitution and existing legislation.

The challenge for the two organisations will be demonstrating that their cooperation can address legitimate concerns without increasing social tensions.

Jacob Zuma’s AfriForum meeting adds context

The latest development also comes after former president Jacob Zuma met with Kriel earlier in the year.

Zuma and Kriel described their meeting as constructive and discussed issues including constitutional self-determination, mother-tongue education, cultural communities and agricultural development.

The meeting generated its own political discussion because the MK Party has positioned itself strongly against President Cyril Ramaphosa and the ANC.

Some analysts have therefore viewed the increasing engagement between organisations with different political backgrounds as part of a wider realignment within South Africa’s opposition and civic landscape.

Professor Bernard Sebake suggested that opposition to the ANC and the government could help explain why groups with otherwise different ideologies might find common ground.

However, this interpretation remains an analysis rather than evidence of a formal political strategy.

Analyst says cooperation is not necessarily political

Not all analysts believe the meeting should be viewed primarily through a political lens.

Political analyst Professor Sipho Seepe argued that South Africa’s democratic system allows organisations with different beliefs to engage with one another.

He stressed the importance of distinguishing between political opponents and enemies.

His argument is that disagreement should not automatically prevent cooperation where organisations have shared objectives.

This perspective provides another way of understanding the March and March-AfriForum alliance raises political motive questions debate.

Rather than representing a new political coalition, the relationship could simply demonstrate how civil society organisations can cooperate selectively.

What the alliance could mean for South Africa

The immediate focus appears to be legal cooperation, community safety, government accountability and the rule of law.

Whether the relationship develops into something more politically significant remains to be seen.

For March and March, the partnership could provide additional organisational and legal expertise as it attempts to establish itself as a more structured civic movement.

For AfriForum, working with March and March could broaden its relationships with organisations representing different communities.

But both groups will face scrutiny over how they manage their differences.

The success of the relationship may ultimately depend on whether the organisations can cooperate on shared concerns without allowing disagreements over race, immigration, identity and political ideology to overwhelm their common objectives.

YOU MAY LIKE:

A relationship to watch

The March and March-AfriForum alliance raises political motive questions because it brings together organisations that have historically occupied different spaces within South African civil society.

For now, both organisations maintain that their cooperation is centred on practical issues such as crime, legal advocacy, immigration and the rule of law.

Whether that cooperation remains issue-specific or develops into a broader political relationship will likely become clearer as the two organisations begin working together.

For South Africans, the development offers another example of how political and civic relationships are changing in a country where traditional ideological boundaries are increasingly being tested.