The situation at Groblersbrug Border Post is rapidly worsening, and many experts believe the congestion is set to grow even more. But here’s where it gets controversial — while official authorities claim they are doing their best, many stakeholders argue that the current measures are simply not enough, and the problem is far from solved. Perhaps more significantly, some critics suggest that the border management strategies currently in place could be contributing to the escalation of delays and safety risks.
Let’s start with the numbers: on Monday, November 17, at around 1 pm, the queue of cross-border trucks stretching from the control gate exceeded 3.2 kilometers. This isn’t the first time such congestion has been reported; just a week earlier, the line was about 1.9 kilometers long. As the traffic continues to pile up, many industry insiders warn that the situation will only become more chaotic.
Both Mike Fitzmaurice of the Transit Assistance Bureau and Kage Barnett of the Trans-Africa Border Hub have issued warnings that the border crossing is likely to experience an increase in traffic volume, which could intensify the current problems.
The core issues remain unchanged: inadequate traffic control, weak enforcement of regulations, border facilities that are overwhelmed by demand, and some transporters disregarding customs procedures by sending non-compliant cargo to the border. Most concerning, however, is the dangerous scenario involving holding areas for tankers carrying hazardous chemicals, which pose serious safety risks if not managed properly.
The Border Management Authority (BMA) claims it is doing everything possible to facilitate smoother trade flows at Groblersbrug. Similarly, the Cross-Border Road Transport Agency echoes this sentiment, though both acknowledge that resource limitations are hampering their efforts.
A recent controversy arose involving Mmemme Mogotsi, the BMA's deputy assistant commissioner for communications. She responded to a report in Freight News that misrepresented her previous statements. The report had suggested that the BMA was working with private sector partners to improve throughput; Mogotsi clarified that while the truck park near the port is privately owned and managed independently, the authority is actively collaborating with stakeholders through its Groblersbrug port management committee.
Concerning private-sector concerns about the use of holding areas meant solely for hazardous chemicals being filled with general cargo trucks, Mogotsi emphasized that the authorities are engaged in ongoing efforts to address these issues. She also defended the BMA’s role, stating that it is not responsible for the private truck park within its border policing jurisdiction of 10 kilometers, contrary to what some reports imply.
However, this explanation has not satisfied many private sector representatives, who demand more decisive action from the BMA. Critics argue that mere 'engagement' or discussion is insufficient, especially when safety and efficiency are at stake. The warnings from Fitzmaurice underline this point; he has repeatedly highlighted that the absence of strict government oversight over dangerous cargo significantly elevates risks for transporters and the public alike. Recent incidents, including a truck fire at the Kazungula crossing further north, underscore the urgency of these safety concerns.
Mogotsi has suggested that Freight News has misunderstood her remarks, alleging that the media outlet falsely claimed the BMA disclaimed responsibility for the private truck park. She insists that her agency maintains continuous dialogue with stakeholders, but the controversy has only intensified, with Mogotsi demanding a retraction from Freight News after the report was published.
Following these events, Mogotsi was invited for an interview to clarify her position further, although she has yet to respond. The report that sparked this dispute can be read here: "DG private truck park ‘not our responsibility’ – BMA".”}
