South African Football Association (SAFA) officials have confirmed that R11 million was spent on a charter transporting Bafana Bafana to Mexico for the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
The disclosure came during a tense parliamentary engagement with SAFA, where MPs repeatedly pressed the federation’s leadership over its financial management, procurement processes and accountability to Parliament.
The SAFA CFO, Gronie Hluyo confirmed that the charter cost approximately R11 million after an MP specifically questioned reports that the association had spent the amount on a single trip.
“We found a charter that costed us about 11 million,” Hluyo told the committee.
The committee wanted to know how SAFA arrived at the service provider, how many quotations were obtained, who approved the expenditure and whether the procurement complied with SAFA’s own procurement policies.
According to the Hluyo, the decision to use a charter followed a request from then-Bafana coach Hugo Broos, who was concerned about the impact of lengthy commercial travel on the team’s preparation for the tournament.
He told MPs that the engagement with the coach occurred approximately two weeks before the team travelled to Mexico.
However, Broos had actually raised the need for a direct charter publicly months earlier.
In March, Broos said he had told SAFA that the team needed a charter to fly directly to Mexico because a conventional journey could take about 26 hours and leave the players needing several days to recover.
The issue therefore raises a question about when SAFA formally began its procurement process for the charter and whether sufficient time existed to obtain competitive quotations and properly assess the options.
Under questioning, Hluyo, acknowledged that there was no tender process for the charter.
Instead, SAFA sourced quotations from charter companies.
The explanation was that the timing made a normal tender impractical.
“We don’t say this is what the coach says, and then you get the first quotation, then we go with it. We sourced various quotations, and the best quotation that we received, we worked with,” Hluyo told MPs.
When pressed on whether the association had advertised for a service provider, the CFO said it had not because of the timing and the specialised nature of aircraft chartering.
The committee, however, wanted to know what happened after the quotations were received.
Hluyo said that SAFA’s Finance Committee approved the broader World Cup budget, which was subsequently taken to the National Executive Committee (NEC), where it was approved.
He also clarified that the NEC approval was of the World Cup budget, rather than necessarily a specific R11 million approval for the charter.
A member of parliament, David Kgabo also from the from ANC pointed out that an overall budget would ordinarily contain specific budget allocations, including a transport component, and asked SAFA to provide the committee with the relevant records.
He then requested that SAFA provide the three quotations obtained for the charter, the name of the service provider ultimately appointed, the procurement process followed, the relevant Finance Committee minutes, the relevant NEC approval documentation, the budget allocation relating specifically to transport/charter costs and an explanation of how the service provider was ultimately selected.
Hluyo agreed to provide the information.
At one point, he said he could not immediately recall the name of the company that provided the charter but would obtain the information from SAFA’s procurement department.
That exchange drew further scrutiny from the committee, particularly because SAFA had simultaneously explained that there were only a small number of companies capable of providing such charter services.
The hearing also raised questions about the role of Sport, Arts and Culture Minister Gayton McKenzie.
The Minister told MPs that after Broos raised concerns about the team’s travel, he contacted various people in an attempt to help SAFA find a suitable aircraft.
He said he contacted the Minister of Transport and others, but stressed that he was not responsible for SAFA’s procurement process.
SAFA’s CFO similarly explained that the Minister had assisted by providing contacts, but that SAFA itself dealt with the procurement.
This distinction matters because the committee specifically raised the possibility that ministerial involvement in identifying potential service providers could cross into procurement interference.
Kgabo ultimately told SAFA that the committee did not want to assume that the Minister had participated in the supply-chain process, because the Minister should not be involved in SAFA’s procurement decisions.
The documentary evidence now requested from SAFA should help establish exactly what role, if any, the Minister played beyond making contacts available.
There is another unresolved issue.
SAFA’s explanation was that the charter became necessary because the coach was concerned about travel time and the team’s preparation.
Yet Broos had publicly identified that problem months before the World Cup.
In March, he specifically warned that the journey to Mexico could take around 26 hours and said a direct charter would significantly improve preparation.
By late May, the team was scheduled to leave for Mexico on a charter.
But the departure was delayed after SAFA encountered visa problems, with SAFA itself apologising for what was described as an administrative failure.
The charter eventually departed Johannesburg after the visa crisis was addressed.
The chronology therefore leaves a key question for SAFA. If the coach’s preference for a direct charter was known months in advance, why was the procurement process only being finalised close to the team’s departure?
What Parliament has established is that SAFA spent approximately R11 million on the charter and is now being asked to substantiate the procurement process behind that expenditure.
The committee is now questioning whether a charter was necessary.
It is asking whether SAFA can produce the documentary evidence showing that the R11 million expenditure was properly sourced, approved and awarded in accordance with its own governance and procurement requirements.
That paper trail could ultimately answer the question at the heart of the controversy,
Who got the R11 million, how was that company selected, and who approved the deal?
The post Who got SAFA’s R11 MILLION? Parliament demands quotations, approvals, and procurement records for Bafana Bafana’s World Cup charter. appeared first on Africa Daily .