Harith General Partners’ Bid for FlySafair Raises Big Questions About Government Influence

By Garth Calitz

South Africa’s airline landscape could be heading for another significant shake-up following reports that infrastructure investment firm Harith General Partners has signed a purchase order to acquire a controlling stake in low-cost carrier FlySafair. While the transaction still faces regulatory approvals and finalisation, the prospect of a new ownership structure at one of the country’s most consistently profitable airlines has sparked both optimism and unease across the aviation community.

FlySafair has, over the past decade, built a reputation as a rare local success story in a challenging market. Operating a tightly managed Boeing 737 fleet, the airline has focused on reliability, competitive pricing and operational discipline. In a sector where margins are razor-thin and balance sheets often turbulent, FlySafair’s ability to remain profitable and expand cautiously has set it apart. For many travellers, it has become the default choice for domestic air travel and for industry observers, a case study in how a private-sector airline can thrive in South Africa’s complex operating environment.

Harith General Partners, for its part, is no stranger to large-scale infrastructure and transport investments. With a portfolio spanning energy, logistics and transport assets across the continent, the company brings deep pockets and long-term investment horizons to the table. On paper, this could be good news for FlySafair. Fresh capital could support fleet growth, route expansion and operational resilience at a time when supply chain disruptions, aircraft availability constraints and rising operating costs continue to challenge airlines worldwide.

However, the proposed acquisition has also triggered concerns about potential indirect government influence. Harith’s investment structure includes participation from state-linked development finance institutions, which has led some commentators to question whether FlySafair could, in time, find itself subject to political or policy pressures. South Africa’s aviation sector has long been shaped by the state’s involvement, most notably through the chequered history of South African Airways (SAA) and its subsidiaries. The spectre of political interference, strategic mandates overriding commercial logic, and the risk of future bailouts funded by taxpayers remains fresh in the industry’s collective memory.

Critics argue that FlySafair’s success has been built precisely on the opposite principles: strict cost control, lean management and freedom from political agendas. Any dilution of that commercial independence, they warn, could erode the very qualities that have made the airline competitive. There is also concern about the broader competitive landscape. FlySafair plays a critical role in keeping domestic fares in check. Should its strategy shift away from a pure low-cost model, the knock-on effects for consumers and for smaller competitors could be significant.

Supporters of the deal counter that fears of “government control by proxy” may be overstated. They point out that Harith operates as a commercial fund manager with fiduciary duties to its investors and that any airline investment will ultimately stand or fall on financial performance. In a tough aviation market, sentiment alone does not pay fuel bills or aircraft leases. From this perspective, the involvement of development finance capital could even provide stability, enabling FlySafair to weather cyclical downturns and invest through the next industry cycle.

Regulatory scrutiny will be central to how the transaction unfolds. The Air Services Licensing Council, competition authorities and potentially foreign ownership regulators will examine the structure of the deal to ensure compliance with local ownership rules and fair competition principles. Transparency around governance, board composition and strategic autonomy will be critical in reassuring both the market and the travelling public that FlySafair will remain commercially driven.

For South Africa’s aviation sector, the proposed acquisition highlights a familiar tension: the need for capital and long-term investment versus the risks associated with political proximity. The country’s airlines operate in a high-cost environment with infrastructure constraints, currency volatility and uneven demand recovery post-pandemic. Private capital is essential for growth and sustainability, but the boundaries between strategic national interests and commercial airline operations must remain clearly defined.

As the deal progresses, much will depend on how Harith positions itself as an owner. If the company maintains FlySafair’s independent management culture and low-cost DNA, the airline could emerge stronger, better capitalised and ready to expand its footprint. If, however, strategic decisions become entangled with non-commercial objectives, the industry may be watching another test case in how ownership structures shape airline performance.

For now, FlySafair’s aircraft continue to turn, on time and with full cabins, and passengers remain largely indifferent to who signs the cheques behind the scenes. Yet in aviation, ownership matters. The coming months will reveal whether this transaction represents a new chapter of sustainable private-sector growth or the first step toward a more complicated relationship between South Africa’s most successful low-cost carrier and the state’s long shadow over the industry.