A confrontation between anti-illegal immigration activists Nhlanhla Lux Dlamini and Nkosikhona “Phakel’umthakathi” Ndabandaba took place during an operation ta...
A confrontation between anti-illegal immigration activists Nhlanhla Lux Dlamini and Nkosikhona “Phakel’umthakathi” Ndabandaba took place during an operation targeting foreign-owned spaza shops in Braamfischerville, Soweto, on Wednesday.
Video footage circulating on social media shows the two men confronting each other as tensions rose during the operation, before police intervened to separate them. The incident has since attracted significant attention online, with reactions divided over the confrontation and the activities of the groups involved.
The operation was focused on foreign-owned spaza shops, with activists calling for action against businesses they allege are being operated by or employing undocumented foreign nationals. The confrontation reportedly happened as efforts were being made to shut down at least one Somali-owned spaza shop.
Advertisement
According to reports from people following the operation, the disagreement centred on the presence and role of the two groups in Braamfischerville. Lux reportedly questioned Ndabandaba’s presence in Soweto and challenged his involvement in activities in the area.
Reports indicate that Lux told Ndabandaba that he could not come into Soweto and instruct residents on what to do. He allegedly also told him to return to Nongoma. These claims could not independently be verified from the footage available.
The confrontation was eventually interrupted by police officers, who moved between the two men as tensions increased. Footage of the incident has since been widely shared online, prompting debate about the relationship between prominent figures involved in South Africa’s anti-illegal immigration campaigns.
Ndabandaba, popularly known as Phakel’umthakathi, has become a prominent figure in campaigns calling for stricter enforcement of immigration laws and action against businesses allegedly employing undocumented migrants. Recent reports have linked him to protests and operations in several parts of the country.
Eyewitness News reported in June that Ndabandaba had gained attention for leading large anti-illegal immigration marches and that some of the demonstrations had been accompanied by incidents of violence and looting. Ndabandaba has denied involvement in looting during his marches.
In July, Ndabandaba also said he had received death threats connected to his activism. He told the media that he had received calls threatening his life and claiming knowledge of his location.
Ndabandaba has continued to campaign against undocumented immigration and foreign-owned businesses. Earlier this month, he participated in a demonstration in Mooi River, KwaZulu-Natal, where activists called on foreign-owned businesses to comply with South African laws and raised concerns about the employment of foreign nationals.
Lux is also a well-known figure in South Africa’s anti-illegal immigration movement. He previously led Operation Dudula, a movement that has campaigned against undocumented foreign nationals and called for stronger enforcement of immigration laws.
The two men have previously appeared within the broader anti-immigration movement, although their latest confrontation illustrates disagreements among activists over who should lead or participate in operations in particular communities. A recent report by the Mail & Guardian identified Lux and Ndabandaba among anti-immigration activists involved in demonstrations and campaigns in KwaZulu-Natal, Johannesburg and Soweto.
The latest confrontation also comes after earlier disagreements among figures associated with South Africa’s anti-immigration campaigns. Reports in July described disputes between activists, including allegations made by Lux concerning Ndabandaba’s activities and organisation. Those disputes have contributed to public discussion about divisions within the movement.
The Braamfischerville incident has generated further debate on social media, with some users questioning why the two activists confronted each other during an operation that was focused on foreign-owned businesses. Others have raised concerns about the possibility of disagreements among activists taking on ethnic dimensions.
Several social-media posts made claims about alleged payments, protection arrangements and the motives of individuals involved in the confrontation. Those allegations have not been independently verified and are therefore not presented as established facts.
Other social-media users also claimed that remarks made during the confrontation could create tensions between Zulu and Sotho communities in Soweto. These claims have likewise not been independently verified, and there is no evidence provided in the available information that the incident represents a broader conflict between ethnic communities.
The incident comes amid heightened activity by groups campaigning against undocumented immigration and foreign-owned businesses in South Africa. Such campaigns have taken place in different parts of the country and have focused on immigration enforcement, employment and the operation of businesses by foreign nationals.
The debate has also attracted criticism from civil society organisations. In June, the South African Council of Churches called on anti-immigration activists to stop threatening foreigner-led churches, following concerns about statements circulating online.
At the same time, Ndabandaba has maintained that his campaigns are focused on illegal immigration and has previously rejected suggestions that he supports violence or looting. In June, he told Eyewitness News that his planned demonstrations were intended to show dissatisfaction with the Government’s handling of illegal immigration and said there should be no destruction or disruption.
The Braamfischerville confrontation therefore adds another development to an increasingly active debate over immigration, foreign-owned businesses and enforcement of South Africa’s immigration laws.
For residents and business owners in affected communities, the issue remains closely linked to questions about who is legally entitled to operate businesses, employ workers and reside in the country. However, any allegations of wrongdoing involving individual businesses or people would need to be established by the relevant authorities.
Police intervention during the confrontation prevented the dispute between Lux and Ndabandaba from escalating further, according to footage of the incident. No information was provided indicating that either man was arrested as a result of the confrontation.
The incident has also renewed attention on the activities of prominent anti-illegal immigration activists, particularly as different groups continue to organise operations and demonstrations in communities across South Africa.
The focus now remains on the wider immigration debate, the enforcement of South African laws and the role of activists in addressing complaints involving foreign nationals and businesses. The allegations circulating online about individuals involved in the Braamfischerville confrontation remain unverified.
As the video continues to attract reactions online, the incident highlights divisions among some activists involved in South Africa’s anti-illegal immigration campaigns. It also underscores the need to distinguish verified information from claims made on social media when reporting on sensitive issues involving immigration and community tensions.
