Excerpt: With only his late mother’s Bible opened at Psalm 23 before him and conviction as his armour, Reyno De Beer stood alone in the Pretoria High Court against the taxpayer-funded legal teams of SARB and SAHPRA. The hearing tested faith, courage, and conscience alike, exposing the uneasy truth about defective court orders and the declining ethics of a once-noble profession. Judgment is now awaited.
If you like our work, why not consider a donation or gift of your choice?
or make Quick donation… MobiPaid
Last week, Liberty Fighters Network (LFN) once again stood alone before the Pretoria High Court — this time against the formidable, taxpayer-funded legal teams of both the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) and the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA).
The hearing, which took place on Tuesday, 28 October 2025, brought to conclusion the arguments in our application challenging the reckless practice of issuing defective court orders — a matter that goes to the very heart of judicial accountability and procedural integrity in South Africa.
⚖️ The Courtroom Experience — Tested but Unbroken
Justice Holland-Müter presided over the matter with notable firmness and intensity. At times, his tone towards me was as sharp and demanding as one might expect toward a seasoned legal practitioner — a level of scrutiny that could easily unsettle anyone unfamiliar with courtroom pressure.
Yet, rather than taking offence, I welcomed it. It affirmed that our arguments were being taken seriously, and that even as a self-represented party, LFN’s position had to be met on equal intellectual footing. I have long accepted that standing for truth in a system accustomed to hierarchy invites challenge, and that challenge sharpens conviction.
What mattered most was that, despite the occasional sternness, the issues were heard — and that is all any citizen can fairly ask of the court.
💥 Alone, but Never Afraid
The courtroom was filled with legal practitioners representing the state and its agencies, all armed with files, clerks, and consultants. On my side, it was mostly just me.
But that is nothing new. Over the years, I’ve become accustomed to facing entire teams of attorneys, senior advocates, and legal advisors — sometimes outnumbered ten to one — and still walking into court with nothing more than truth, conviction, and faith.
Before me on the table lay my late mother’s well-worn Bible, opened at Psalm 23 —
“Al gaan ek ook in ‘n dal van doodskaduwee. ek sal geen onheil vrees nie; want U is met my…
[Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me…]”
And indeed, there was no fear — only calm resolve. There was a quiet uneasiness in the courtroom that could be sensed rather than seen. It wasn’t intimidation; it was conscience. The kind of discomfort that comes when ethics and integrity are put to the test in a place meant to uphold both.
🙌 Support That Strengthened the Moment
In the midst of this tense atmosphere, I was humbled and encouraged to see Henry McCarter and Sylvester Papa Teng — long-standing fellow activists of a similar cause — quietly appear in court for moral support. Their presence was a reminder that this fight is not mine alone; it belongs to every South African who still believes in truth, fairness, and accountability.
Their encouragement meant more than words could describe, and I thank them sincerely.
⚖️ The Case That Strikes at the System’s Heart
Our case seeks to affirm a simple but powerful principle:
Once a judge pronounces an order and it is signed and sealed by the Registrar, no one — not even the Registrar — may alter it without judicial direction.
That’s not merely a procedural technicality; it’s a constitutional safeguard to prevent tampering, error, and abuse. Unfortunately, this has not been followed with the care it deserves, and countless orders across our courts may already be tainted by this dangerous habit.
We are not before the court to attack it — quite the opposite.
We are here to protect the court’s integrity, to restore faith in its record-keeping, and to remind the legal profession of its duty to serve justice before prestige.
As I pointed out, the Legal Practice Council’s latest report shows that there are, on average, more than one complaint for every two legal practitioners in South Africa. If that is not a crisis of ethics, then what is?
It is time for the profession to rediscover its nobility — not in its titles, but in its conduct.
🧱 The State’s Reaction — Seeing LFN as a Threat
Throughout the hearing, it became clear that the state’s representatives perceive LFN as a threat — not because of what we have done wrong, but because we are doing what they refuse to do: expose and challenge a broken system from within.
Both SARB and SAHPRA’s legal teams went out of their way to try to defame LFN and myself personally, twisting facts and rhetoric in an attempt to discredit our work.
But truth does not bend under insult.
If anything, it only proves that our efforts to bring light into dark corners of bureaucracy are working.
🕊️ Awaiting Judgment
The arguments have now been fully concluded, and Justice Holland-Müter has reserved judgment. We await the outcome with confidence, faith, and patience — knowing that the purpose of this case extends far beyond the courtroom.
Regardless of the judgment, history will remember that LFN stood up when others stayed silent — not for recognition or reward, but to defend the integrity of justice itself.
💳 Support Our Ongoing Work
LFN survives purely on voluntary public donations.
The vast majority of our work is dedicated to helping ordinary South Africans in their battles against the system and the banks — especially when the legal profession fails to stand by them.
We don’t have secret funders, political sponsors, or media financiers — only the People, united in faith and conscience.
Every contribution, no matter how small, helps us continue this essential mission.
Kindly consider supporting our work by giving a donation or gift of your choice.
