Excerpt: Liberty Fighters Network has uncovered a coordinated attempt by the South African Poultry Association (SAPA) to shield the DA’s Minister John Steenhuisen from accountability after he failed to file his answering affidavit by 13 November 2025. Instead of engaging with the unlawful and premature importation of avian-influenza vaccines, SAPA launched an aggressive intervention filled with personal attacks while openly rejecting mediation. The Minister’s silence and SAPA’s hostility now make it clear that LFN stands alone between the public and a political-industry alliance determined to avoid scrutiny. We will proceed to enrol the review as unopposed and continue exposing the truth in defence of South Africans’ safety, transparency, and constitutional rights.
If you like our work, why not consider a donation or gift of your choice?
or make Quick donation… MobiPaid
Over the past two weeks, Liberty Fighters Network (LFN) has faced what can only be described as an open declaration of war by the South African Poultry Association (SAPA) — and, by all indications, on direct instruction of Democratic Alliance (DA) leader, and Agricultural Minister, John Steenhuisen. What began as a principled Rule 53 review to protect South African consumers, farmers, and poultry workers from irrational health-risk decisions has grown into a coordinated effort to silence the only organisation willing to challenge the Minister’s conduct.
It might be of interest to the public that Steenhuisen’s cousin, Colin Steenhuisen, sits on the SAPA executive.
But in the midst of SAPA’s sudden aggression, a critical fact must not be forgotten:
Steenhuisen’s answering affidavit was due on 13 November 2025. He ignored the deadline.
Despite having our supplement for weeks, despite being under a legal obligation to explain his actions, and despite the public-health impact of his decisions, Steenhuisen simply failed to respond.
His silence speaks louder than SAPA’s attacks ever could.
And it confirms what we suspected from the start —
The Minister is hiding. SAPA is simply the shield with his cousin assisting to call the shots attacking LFN.
1. SAPA’s intervention was never independent
SAPA connections informed us that they had been “requested” to intervene and then instructed to stop communicating with LFN. SAPA did not independently study the record or assess the risks posed by the Minister’s vaccine decision.
Instead, SAPA stepped forward exactly when the Minister’s answering deadline approached, functioning not as an industry watchdog but as an industry bodyguard.
2. SAPA chose personal attacks over substance
Rather than addressing the documented irregularities — including the fact that the Minister ordered and imported vaccines before any permits or approvals existed — SAPA’s CEO, Izaak Breteinbach, launched a founding affidavit full of personal attacks against LFN and myself.
No evidence.
No engagement with the Rule 53 record.
No explanation for the Minister’s premature procurement.
Just a deliberate attempt to undermine the messenger.
3. SAPA’s own standing is questionable
Their “round-robin” authorisation raises real doubts:
- Was the full board consulted?
- Was SAPA’s broader membership informed?
- Why did a Steenhuisen family member play a role in signing off the litigation?
The more SAPA fights LFN, the clearer the conflict becomes.
4. LFN extended an olive branch — SAPA rejected it
We made every effort to de-escalate:
- We served our notices,
- We set out a path for amicable resolution,
- We proposed mediation under Rule 41A.
SAPA refused in writing.
They even copied the State Attorney’s office when doing so — a clear signal that collaboration with the Minister is not speculation; it is strategy.
5. The Minister’s silence now changes everything
With the deadline for his answering affidavit having passed on 13 November 2025, the Minister is now in default.
This is a pivotal turning point.
While SAPA is fighting LFN with ferocity, the Minister — the party whose decision is actually under review — has produced nothing.
No explanation.
No defence.
No justification for bypassing local manufacturers.
No response to the allegation that he imported vaccines before approval.
No engagement with the health risks raised.
Nothing.
And therefore:
LFN will now proceed to enrol the review application on the unopposed roll.
SAPA may wish to fight us, but SAPA is not the decision-maker.
The Minister is.
And the Minister has failed to comply with the Rules of Court.
6. LFN will not be deterred
SAPA may have chosen conflict.
The Minister may have chosen silence.
But LFN chooses accountability.
We will now:
- Enrol the matter as unopposed,
- Place SAPA’s conduct before the Court,
- Expose the Minister’s avoidance of lawful scrutiny,
- And ensure the South African public sees who is protecting whom — and who is protecting them.
We asked for civility.
We received hostility.
We asked for accountability.
We were met with silence.
So now we proceed — firmly, transparently, and without fear.
Kindly consider supporting our work by giving a donation or gift of your choice.
