Johannesburg — A citizen-led constitutional accountability campaign has captured the hearts and wallets of thousands of South Africans, with the SACR BackaBuddy campaign surpassing its R500,000 fundraising target just weeks after launch. Driven by multi-award-winning civic activist and nuclear energy communicator Princy Mthombeni, the South Africans for Constitutional Reform (SACR) movement is now preparing to take the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa to court for allegedly failing in its constitutional obligations.
Key facts at a glance:
- Campaign launched: 24 May 2026
- Funds raised: R538,952 (as of publication)
- Goal: R500,000
- Unique donors: 5,404
- Campaign platform: BackaBuddy
- Purpose: Fund litigation compelling Parliament to comply with public participation obligations
SACR BackaBuddy Campaign Breaks Its Own Target
South Africans for Constitutional Reform raised the funds to pursue legal action aimed at ensuring transparency, accountability, and meaningful public participation in Parliament’s constitutional review process. The campaign’s rapid success signals that public frustration with institutional unresponsiveness has reached a boiling point — and that ordinary citizens are willing to fund the fight themselves.
Mthombeni announced the official launch of the BackaBuddy campaign on 24 May 2026, stating that funds raised would assist with litigation-related costs aimed at compelling Parliament to comply with its constitutional obligations on public participation, accountability and transparency. The speed at which donations poured in speaks to both her credibility as a public figure and the depth of civic frustration across the country.
Parliament’s Silence Sparked a Legal Battle
In May 2025, Parliament invited South Africans to submit proposals for constitutional amendments as part of the Constitutional Review process, and SACR answered that call. After submitting detailed constitutional reform proposals supported by more than 30,000 South Africans, Parliament failed to acknowledge receipt or communicate any process updates.
This institutional silence is precisely what SACR describes as a violation of the constitutional right to public participation. South Africa’s Constitution guarantees citizens the right to be heard in legislative processes, and the failure to acknowledge a submission backed by over 30,000 signatures raises serious questions about Parliament’s commitment to democratic accountability. The litigation being funded is not just about SACR — it sets a precedent for every citizen who has ever submitted a comment, petition, or formal proposal and heard nothing back.
Who Is Princy Mthombeni?
Princess Mthombeni, known by many as “Princy”, is a multi-award-winning communication specialist, a lifelong nuclear technology enthusiast, and a World Nuclear University alumnus from eNanda in KwaZulu-Natal. Her reputation was built primarily in the energy sector, where she founded Africa4Nuclear, an advocacy campaign promoting nuclear energy as central to Africa’s sustainable development agenda.
Globally, Princy has been recognised at the Women in Nuclear Global Excellence Award in 2022, named the most dedicated member by Women in Nuclear South Africa in the same year, and later received a Giraffe Heroes Award as well as an excellence award from the African Commission on Nuclear Energy Nuclear Advocacy. Her pivot from energy advocacy into constitutional reform reflects a broader pattern: South Africans with established platforms increasingly using those platforms to hold the state accountable through formal legal channels rather than protests alone.
What SACR Is Fighting For
The SACR petition calls for meaningful constitutional reform that delivers safety and justice, including a review of capital punishment provisions; economic justice and national ownership; and stronger mechanisms for citizen participation in legislative processes. The movement positions itself as a citizen body — not a political party — that exists specifically to coordinate public engagement during the constitutional review window.
SACR has also engaged on immigration reform, mobilising South Africans to participate in the public comment process for the Revised Draft White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection, compiling real input from workers, parents, youth, and business owners into one consolidated submission. This reveals a movement with a broader civic mandate: ensuring that government policy processes are not merely box-ticking exercises but genuine consultations. For South Africans who feel left behind by a political class perceived as distant and unaccountable, SACR offers a structured vehicle for legal recourse.
What the Funds Will Be Used For
The BackaBuddy campaign page makes clear how the R500,000 target — now exceeded — will be deployed. Funds are earmarked for legal consultations, actual litigation costs in court, broader advocacy work, and public accountability efforts. This is crowd-funded constitutional litigation: a model growing rapidly in South Africa, where organisations like the Centre for Child Law, Equal Education, and others have used legal action funded by civil society donations to force state compliance.
The fact that 5,404 unique donors contributed to this campaign in under three weeks tells its own story. At an average donation of roughly R100, this is not wealthy donors writing large cheques — it is ordinary South Africans contributing what they can to a cause they believe in. That kind of grassroots financial mobilisation is difficult to manufacture and nearly impossible to ignore in a courtroom, where it serves as evidence of genuine public interest in the matter at hand. For context on how citizen participation intersects with South Africa’s legal framework, the South African Department of Justice’s constitutional resources portal outlines the public’s entrenched rights in legislative processes.
What Happens Next for SACR
With funds secured beyond the initial target and three months still remaining on the campaign, SACR is now positioned to proceed with formal legal steps. The organisation has indicated it will pursue court action to compel Parliament to respond meaningfully to its constitutional reform submissions. Should the litigation succeed, it would create binding precedent requiring Parliament to formally acknowledge and engage with public submissions during review processes — a development that would reshape how civic bodies interact with the legislature for years to come.
Mthombeni has also signalled that the Change.org petition backing SACR’s reform proposals attracted over 30,000 signatories, a figure that legal counsel is expected to place before the court as evidence of public interest. Whether the courts agree that Parliament’s silence constitutes a breach of constitutional obligation remains to be seen, but SACR has already achieved something significant: it has demonstrated that South Africans, when given a clear and credible vehicle, will fund constitutional accountability with their own money.
