The South African National Defence Force was not immune to COVID-19 procurement corruption. Despite its hierarchical command structure and ostensibly rigid procurement controls, the SANDF experienced R272.8 million in procurement irregularities — and five years later, no major prosecutions have been completed.
**The Irregularities**
The SIU investigation found non-compliance with procurement regulations, misrepresentations by service providers, and evidence of collusion between suppliers and SANDF officials. Financial losses exceeding R28 million were proven — though the full scale of losses from the R272.8M in irregular procurement remains unclear.
**Military Court Proceedings**
Four SANDF members appeared at Military Court on allegations of R273 million PPE fraud and corruption. The use of the military justice system rather than civilian courts adds a layer of opacity — military court proceedings receive less public scrutiny and media coverage.
**The Pension Preservation**
In March 2025, the SIU secured a preservation order against the R1.5 million pension benefit of Nangamso Tyibilika, former SANDF Chief Director of Budget Management. The pension preservation represents the SIU's effort to prevent accused officials from accessing retirement benefits before civil recovery proceedings are completed.
**The Bigger Picture: R2.5 Billion Unresolved**
The SANDF PPE case sits within a broader context of R2.5 billion in defence corruption cases that remain unresolved as of 2025. No major prosecutions have been completed. The defence sector benefits from institutional opacity, national security claims, and a military justice system that operates with limited public accountability.
**The Accountability Failure**
Five years after the fraud, the outcome is: - 4 accused before Military Court — proceedings ongoing - 1 pension preservation order (R1.5M) - R28M in proven losses - R2.5B in unresolved defence corruption - Zero completed major prosecutions
The SANDF COVID PPE scandal demonstrates that procurement corruption is not limited to civilian departments — military institutions are equally vulnerable, and even less accountable.