Would you give Zimbabwe's army military grade helicopters?

I know I wouldn't, if it was in my power to make such decisions. And you don't need to search too hard on Google to understand why the notoriously pro-Mugabe military in Zimbabwe should not be further supported in terms of such hardware.

So why and how did the South African National Defence Force think they could get away with donating a full fleet? Did they think no one would notice?

Luckily, groups like AfriForum exist for the simple fact that they challenged this donation, and this week an interdict against the delivery of the helicopters was upheld.

Here's my latest report:

A fleet of helicopters that were set to be donated to Zimbabwe’s military by the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), will remain where they are for now.

The North Gauteng High Court in South Africa on Thursday upheld an interdict against the delivery of the helicopters, meaning the donation will not happen in the near future. The Court also ordered the government to pay costs for Thursday’s legal proceedings.

The legal battle began soon after it emerged in January that the SANDF was planning to gift its fleet of unused Alouette helicopters to the Zimbabwean army. Civil rights group AfriForum had applied for an urgent interdict to stop the donation and that interim interdict was granted to allow time for the main application challenging the donation to be finalised.

AfriForum is arguing against the donation on the basis that Zimbabwe’s human rights record indicates that the helicopters could be used to facilitate oppression. The group has warned that South Africa would be complicit in such oppression if it willing gifted the helicopters, in spite of the human rights record across the border.

This is of particular concern as Zimbabwe heads towards elections, and incidents of politically motivated violence as well as a crackdown on civil society have intensified.

AfriForum’s legal representative Willie Spies told SW Radio Africa on Thursday that the interdict was upheld because of a ‘concession’ by the government’s legal team.

“It was quite an awkward experience. We were ready for the process and had gone to a great deal of trouble to ensure the matter was brought before court in a relatively small amount of time. That was on the insistence of the legal team of the government,” Spies explained.

He continued: “But all a sudden the senior advocate for the government indicated he was not well and was not ready to carry on. And the government just tendered costs and said the matter should be postponed for an indefinite period. They also offered that the interim indict be maintained until the process is finalised.”

“So it’s quite a concession by the government lawyers and means the matter was not formally heard. We are satisfied for the simple reason that the helicopters will not be exported, will not be donated, will not be delivered.”

Spies went on to explain that they are now waiting for the government’s lawyers to proceed, but stressed “we won’t rush the matter. As soon as the government’s lawyers are ready, we will go to court. In the time being, we have what we need.”

“The only way the helicopters will be donated is if the government’s lawyers successfully challenge our review application. I have serious doubts that they will be successful. We have a very strong case. I’m not convinced they have a strong case. The fact that the lead council today essentially kicked for touch is indicated that they are not confident to go to court,” Spies said.