The president of the South African Football Association (Safa), Danny Jordaan, asserted that no agreement has been finalized with Hugo Broos regarding a contract extension, maintaining that uncertainty persists concerning the future of the Bafana Bafana head coach.
Broos' existing contract concludes at the end of the current month. This follows previous indications from the 74-year-old Belgian that he planned to step down from coaching duties after the 2026 Fifa World Cup. The experienced mentor successfully led Bafana to a significant World Cup run in North America, reaching the knockout stages for the first time before being eliminated in the Round of 32.
Despite this, talks about Broos' future have continued, with media reports suggesting that Safa might propose a one-year extension to allow him to guide the team into the Africa Cup of Nations, which is scheduled for East Africa in June and July of next year.
Jordaan addressed these issues during the launch event for Pitso Mosimane's Youth Football: Coaching Manual in Sandton, Johannesburg, where he faced questions about recent developments. The SAFA president explicitly refuted claims that Hugo Broos had been offered a one-year contract, stating, 'There is no such thing as Safa signing a one-year contract with Broos. It doesn’t exist. It’s nonsense.'
He further commented on the circulating rumors, saying, 'And it’s better that this nonsense is not put out there. I just came back [from the World Cup] yesterday [Wednesday] and I saw. What is this now? It’s nonsense.'
When questioned about the current status of the head coach, Jordaan acknowledged having a coach but stressed that the final decision would adhere to the federation's established internal protocols. He explained the procedure: 'There is a process. The technical committee makes a recommendation to the [Safa] national executive [NEC]. The NEC finally decides on the coach.' Jordaan firmly stated that decisions could not be overridden externally, adding, 'So you cannot stop me in the street and hijack a decision. It’s not going to happen.'
As the interview grew more intense, Jordaan urged patience, telling the journalist, 'No, no, South Africa must wait. South Africa must understand the World Cup ended just yesterday.' He concluded the discussion by advising the journalist to 'behave yourself.'
The ongoing uncertainty regarding Broos' tenure coincides with Pitso Mosimane emerging as one of the potential candidates should Safa opt for a change. Mosimane confirmed at his book launch that he had been contacted by the association as part of preliminary discussions concerning a possible succession plan, though no final determination has been made regarding Broos' future. For the time being, Safa confirms that the selection process is still active as the federation determines the path forward for Bafana Bafana following their recent World Cup participation.
As the deadline for the Madlanga Commission approaches, critics are expressing concern that President Cyril Ramaphosa has not been summoned to give testimony before the retiring judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga. Authors argue that without the president's critical evidence, the commission's final report will be incomplete.
The Madlanga Commission, operating ahead of its final deadline of November 16, 2026, has highlighted serious issues within the criminal justice system. Over nearly a year, the commission has revealed how complex criminal syndicates allegedly infiltrated the upper echelons of the South African Police Service (SAPS), the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), and even State investigative and intelligence agencies. The commission's work has been noted for positive aspects, including directions for criminal investigations and staff dismissals, yet a significant gap remains in the narrative.
This gap is linked to the absence of testimony from one individual whose constitutional duties place him at the center of the current crisis—President Cyril Ramaphosa. Since August 2025, the United Citizens Movement (UCM), led by the Progressive Citizens Congress (PCC), has regularly corresponded with the commission, insisting that the president be summoned as a key witness. However, their appeals have met bureaucratic evasion, ignoring the issue of presidential accountability.
The president is a central witness who previously appeared before the commission. The commission's charter explicitly requires an investigation into the role of 'any member of the national executive body responsible for the criminal justice system.' Although the rules allow for the summoning of any witness, Ramaphosa, who is subject to the State Security Agency (SSA), remains overlooked. This silence raises serious questions, especially in light of disputes over the dissolution of the Political Kill Team (PKTT).
Dismissed Police Minister Senzo Mchunu stated that he discussed with the president the intention and decision to liquidate the PKTT in 2024, and that Ramaphosa agreed to it. Dismissed National Commissioner of Police Fanny Masemola reported meeting with Ramaphosa in February 2025 to express dissatisfaction with Mchunu's directive to close a successful unit. Masemola claims the president appeared 'defeated' by this decision and seemed unaware of it. These versions contain internal contradictions.
The question arises: did the president deliberately pretend not to know about the dissolution of the effective PKTT when speaking with Masemola? If so, why? If Mchunu is correct, why would the head of state agree to the liquidation of a police unit fighting crime? These questions cast doubt on whether the president is aiding crime in the country. Without the president's testimony, there are only mutual accusations that serve the interests of the criminal networks that the PKTT is trying to expose.
Since the SSA reports directly to the president, and he receives weekly intelligence briefings, it is unlikely that he was unaware of corruption in the Security Sector before Lieutenant General Nlanhla Mkhwanazi made statements on July 6, 2025. If the president knew about the problems, why did he not take steps to stop them? These questions can only be resolved through the president's sworn testimony.
Ramaphosa's tenure is characterized by reliance on expensive investigative commissions that promise accountability but deliver little. A pattern is observed: extensive evidence, detailed reports, and then nothing. Real consequences and prosecutions remain minimal. Citizens are tired of this 'commissionalism,' which seems designed to manage political crises and stall time rather than ensure justice.
The president's testimony is necessary to answer a fundamental question: is the Madlanga Commission a genuine instrument of accountability or merely another means of protecting influential figures and maintaining the status quo. The investigation should not be limited to rank-and-file employees and dismissed generals; it must reach the highest levels, including the SSA director-general and the president. The public demands the truth from the president under oath.
The commission must use the full extent of its power to summon Ramaphosa before it is too late. Failure to do so will confirm the public's worst fears that in South Africa, there is one law for the powerful and another for ordinary citizens. The commission's final act will determine whether it becomes a triumph of justice or a tragedy of deliberate omission.
South Africa is at a critical juncture in its democratic journey. Thirty-two years after establishing democracy, the country has achieved significant successes, building democratic institutions and protecting constitutional rights, demonstrating to the world that a deeply divided society can choose reconciliation over revenge.
However, history teaches that the fate of a nation is determined not only by its past but also by its future. Therefore, the article's author suggests posing a complex but necessary question: who will lead South Africa over the next twenty years, and are we preparing suitable leaders for the desired future? It is also important to define the qualities these leaders must possess.
For a long time, the national dialogue focused on dismantling apartheid, promoting reconciliation, and correcting historical injustices. These themes remain relevant as inequality persists and the promise of economic inclusion has yet to be fulfilled.
Nevertheless, the new generation of South Africans faces different anxieties. Parents worry about job security in five years, youth doubt whether a university degree guarantees employment, and entrepreneurs question the possibility of competing with long-established companies. Families struggle with the rising cost of living, tuition, healthcare, transport, and housing. Society lives in constant fear of violent crime, drugs, gender-based violence, and deteriorating public services. These issues have become today's reality, not tomorrow's problems.
Each generation inherits its national task. If parents fought for political freedom, the current generation must ensure economic opportunities. Political freedom without economic participation leaves millions of citizens excluded from democratic promises. Economic growth has ceased to be solely an economic issue; it is a social, familial, and national stability concern. Without genuine economic inclusion, inequality widens, frustration deepens, and hope slowly fades. Consequently, leadership must evolve alongside societal challenges.
As a Black entrepreneur, the author often reflects on the real state of affairs in the South African economy. Imagine starting a business over ten or fifteen years, and then compare that to competing against a company that has existed for fifty years, strengthened by generations of accumulated assets, capital, equipment, intellectual property, supplier networks, and financial reserves. Although both companies should compete under equal commercial conditions, their starting points are different. This situation does not require special privileges, but rather an acknowledgment that true transformation requires creating an environment where new enterprises have a real chance to grow into globally competitive organizations. Supporting entrepreneurship should be viewed not as charity, but as a national economic strategy, as today's small businesses are tomorrow's large employers.
The world is changing faster than at any point in modern history. Artificial intelligence is transforming industries, automation is reshaping production, and digital technologies are altering government operations, business competition, and the education system. Climate change affects agriculture, infrastructure, and public health, while cybersecurity has gained importance comparable to national security. Countries like China continue to invest heavily in innovation, advanced manufacturing, and technology, while the United States remains a global leader in research and entrepreneurship. European and Asian countries are also investing in future industries, scientific research, and digital infrastructure. South Africans must answer a simple question: what place does our country hold in this rapidly changing global landscape? Are we preparing our youth for the jobs of tomorrow? Do our educational systems meet the demands of the future economy? Are we investing enough in science, engineering, technology, entrepreneurship, and innovation?
Modern leadership requires more than just political experience; it requires understanding how ordinary families live. Parents worry not only about elections but also about mortgage payments, health insurance, the ability to cover educational expenses if they earn too much for aid but not enough to afford it comfortably themselves. They are concerned about children's safety in schools, the infiltration of drugs into communities, unreliable public infrastructure, healthcare, and crime. Good governance begins with understanding these daily realities, as politics only matters when it improves people's lives.
One of the main weaknesses of modern politics is the tendency to think only until the next election. Great nations are built by leaders who plan twenty or thirty years ahead. Singapore was not built in five years, China's economic transformation took decades, and South Korea consistently invested in education and industrial development. Rwanda engages in long-term national planning. Successful states create institutions that outlive individual leaders. South Africa must adopt the same approach so that national development does not depend solely on personalities but is based on a shared vision that withstands changes in political leadership.
Perhaps our biggest mistake is asking if we have good leaders before deciding what leadership should look like. Before choosing leaders, the qualities they must possess need to be agreed upon. South Africa needs leaders with impeccable integrity who understand the economy as deeply as they understand politics. They must embrace technology and innovation, value education, and encourage entrepreneurship rather than hindering it. They must be able to unite diverse communities around a common national goal, welcome accountability rather than fearing it, make evidence-based decisions, and invest in the next generation, not in short-term popularity. Most importantly, there is a need for leaders who genuinely understand that every political decision ultimately affects the families around the dinner table across the country.
Imagine a South Africa where unemployment has sharply decreased due to the flourishing of entrepreneurship. Imagine schools graduating world-class students. Imagine safer communities, top-tier digital infrastructure, and public service based on professionalism, not patronage. Imagine an economy where innovation is one of the greatest export goods, and young South Africans choose to build their future here because they believe this country offers opportunities equal to any other nation. This vision is achievable, but it will require exceptional leadership.
Perhaps we have been asking the wrong question all along. Instead of asking, 'Who should lead South Africa?', we should first ask: 'What kind of leadership will allow South Africa to compete, thrive, and inspire confidence by 2040?' Only by answering this question honestly can we begin to define, develop, and elect leaders capable of realizing this vision. The future of South Africa is not predetermined by chance; it will be shaped by today's choices. History will one day ask what our generation did in the face of uncertainty. The author hopes that our answer will be to choose to think beyond politics, beyond personalities, and beyond the next election, choosing to build a nation whose greatest legacy is not merely surviving democracy, but ensuring opportunity, dignity, and hope for every subsequent generation.
