Under legal pressure from two farmer unions and a business lobby group, Minister of Agriculture John Steenhuisen has submitted last-minute proposals that could, in practice, open the door to farmers privately sourcing and procuring foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccines, subject to veterinary direction.

“When death knocks on the door, then presto,” and “Suddenly, when the shoe pinches, all kinds of things are done.” These striking remarks were made by the judge addressing the minister’s late filings and his change in stance regarding private vaccination.

The minister's original refusal to allow private procurement and administration of FMD vaccines caused considerable harm to farmers and livestock owners. In February 2026, Sakeliga, Free State Agriculture, and the Southern African Agri Initiative (SAAi) filed an urgent application challenging the minister's stance. Sakeliga is a business lobby group while Free State Agriculture and SAAI are farmer unions.

South Africa’s eight other provincial farmers unions and their national leadership body, AgriSA, had refused to support the action, preferring instead to try and ingratiate themselves with the government even as their members suffered material losses that threatened the financial viability of their farms.

Until minutes before the hearing, the minister had vehemently opposed allowing private FMD vaccination by farmers themselves, arguing the state maintain near-absolute control over the procurement and administration of vaccines. This was despite the fact that farmers and private veterinarians routinely source and administer vaccines for a host of animal diseases.

However, following court pressure, the minister’s legal team introduced a draft scheme that should enable private vaccine procurement and administration by farmers as long as they are so directed by authorised private veterinarians. While the draft scheme is vague on how these vaccines are to be procured, it provides for obtaining the vaccines from any “licenced manufacturer, importer or distributor,” pointing to the minister recognising that the state will not continue to be the sole provider and distributor.

The court requires the minister to finalise the proposed scheme by 17 April 2026, after which a further hearing is scheduled for 28 April 2026 to evaluate the lawfulness of the minister’s actions and its relevance for the players in Sakeliga, SAAI, and Free State Agriculture’s urgent case.

Despite the progress, Sakeliga told The Common Sense that the draft scheme still risks centralising vaccine importation, procurement, and distribution through a state-controlled committee, potentially limiting the private sector's role. The minister also retains broad powers to enforce mandates that could undermine the scheme and reintroduce centralised control at any time.

Sakeliga, Free State Agriculture, and SAAI will continue to monitor the minister’s actions and will pursue further court action if he seeks to claw back the near-Soviet levels of state control he had insisted on to date.

However, Steenhuisen’s legal and political standing has been weakened given that Onderstepoort Biological Products and the Agricultural Research Centre — both state-owned entities — have withdrawn their opposition to Sakeliga and co’s legal actions. It is now only the minister and the director-general of the Department of Agriculture and the Director of Animal Health, both of which fall under Steenhuisen, who remain opposed.

Steenhuisen’s insistence on near-absolute state direction of the foot-and-mouth pandemic response and vaccine access greatly alienated the DA from farming communities.

DA insiders have told The Common Sense that President Cyril Ramaphosa supported this centralised approach from day one, though this remains unclear. Following pressure from the beef industry regarding Steenhuisen’s performance, the president appointed the well-regarded Wandile Sihlobo as his special “envoy” for agriculture – essentially a parallel appointment to that of the minister.

ANC insiders have taken delight in the damage that Steenhuisen’s mismanagement of the pandemic has caused to confidence in the DA, particularly its insistence on state direction, which contradicted the DA's traditional policy stance in favour of private sector solutions to national problems.

The matter will resume on 28 April 2026, after all parties have had a chance to review the published scheme. If the final scheme is deemed unlawful or unduly restrictive to private procurement, further legal action may be taken.

The action taken by Free State Agriculture, SAAI, and Sakeliga could bring great relief to South Africa’s farmers, who faced heavy losses from the FMD outbreak, and also to consumers, who should see beef retail prices level off as the supply constraints forced by the pandemic are relieved.