Scholarlink

The concept of governance has been evolving over time, with emphasis shifting from one area to another, but all aimed at providing incremental improvements. Looking at South Africa’s governance framework in the defence force after more than 30 years of democracy would be fundamentally different from what it was then, and how it has evolved with time. Further complicating matters is the fact that South Africa transitioned into democracy from an apartheid-based system which had a different political system, culture and therefore different priorities. The change in the governance culture and framework generally characterise most, if not all, transitioning political systems. For instance, countries that had been under colonial rule had to revisit their governance frameworks after liberation. Similarly, countries that had been part of the former Soviet Union had to introduce or adapt their way of governance in line with the new political realities (Vhumbunu 2019). While the afore-mentioned examples would be taking place at a macro level (state level), the same reality could manifest at micro level (corporate level). For instance, companies that are taken over by a new owner after a merger or acquisition process would have to realign its governance framework with the new parent company. Therefore, the fundamental change in the governance system of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) from its predecessor—the South African Defence Force (SADF)—was inevitable. One of the widely used instruments for gauging governance status in Africa is the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) n.d., which is issued under the auspices of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation. The Mo Ibrahim Foundation defines governance as ‘the provision of political, social, economic and environmental goods that a citizen has the right to expect from their state, and that a state has the responsibility to deliver to its citizens’ (Mo Ibrahim Foundation, n.d.). According to IIAG, South Africa has consistently scored an average of 66 points out of 100 since 2014 to 2022 but dipped slightly (−1.4 points) to 65.9 in 2023. One of the contributory factors was the decline in the category score of security and the rule of law governance, which has been deteriorating from 64.1 points in 2014 to 60.2 points in 2023 (Mo Ibrahim Foundation, n.d.).

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

South Africa’s Defence Governance Framework in the Post-Apartheid Era

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2026年

查看全文
  • Moses B. Khanyile

摘要

The concept of governance has been evolving over time, with emphasis shifting from one area to another, but all aimed at providing incremental improvements. Looking at South Africa’s governance framework in the defence force after more than 30 years of democracy would be fundamentally different from what it was then, and how it has evolved with time. Further complicating matters is the fact that South Africa transitioned into democracy from an apartheid-based system which had a different political system, culture and therefore different priorities. The change in the governance culture and framework generally characterise most, if not all, transitioning political systems. For instance, countries that had been under colonial rule had to revisit their governance frameworks after liberation. Similarly, countries that had been part of the former Soviet Union had to introduce or adapt their way of governance in line with the new political realities (Vhumbunu 2019). While the afore-mentioned examples would be taking place at a macro level (state level), the same reality could manifest at micro level (corporate level). For instance, companies that are taken over by a new owner after a merger or acquisition process would have to realign its governance framework with the new parent company. Therefore, the fundamental change in the governance system of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) from its predecessor—the South African Defence Force (SADF)—was inevitable. One of the widely used instruments for gauging governance status in Africa is the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) n.d., which is issued under the auspices of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation. The Mo Ibrahim Foundation defines governance as ‘the provision of political, social, economic and environmental goods that a citizen has the right to expect from their state, and that a state has the responsibility to deliver to its citizens’ (Mo Ibrahim Foundation, n.d.). According to IIAG, South Africa has consistently scored an average of 66 points out of 100 since 2014 to 2022 but dipped slightly (−1.4 points) to 65.9 in 2023. One of the contributory factors was the decline in the category score of security and the rule of law governance, which has been deteriorating from 64.1 points in 2014 to 60.2 points in 2023 (Mo Ibrahim Foundation, n.d.).