Court rules against Tshwane speaker over no confidence motion

The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has overturned Tshwane speaker and councillor for the African Transformation Movement Mncedi Ndzwanana’s decision to deny a motion of no confidence in himself. Picture: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers

The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has overturned Tshwane speaker and councillor for the African Transformation Movement Mncedi Ndzwanana’s decision to deny a motion of no confidence in himself. Picture: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers

Published 6h ago

Share

CITY of Tshwane speaker Mncedi Ndzwanana could soon be in line to face the axe after ActionSA succeeded in having his decision to disallow a motion of no confidence in himself set aside.

Ndzwanana, an African Transformation Movement councillor, was elected speaker in March 2023, but after a few weeks in office, ActionSA tabled a motion to oust him.

Initially, ActionSA filed an urgent application to interdict the April 12, 2023, special council sitting and prohibit Ndzwanana from chairing, adjourning, and/or interfering directly or indirectly with the meeting.

The party also wanted councillors from other political parties represented in council not to be allowed to commit unlawful acts, disrupt the meeting, and take any unlawful steps to inhibit councillors from participating in the meeting.

Instead, ActionSA sought to have a special council meeting on April 13 to approve the budget but the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, dismissed its urgent application without any reasons and the matter was enrolled in the normal court roll.

ActionSA said after the application was dismissed, it did not know why the court considered dismissing the matter.

The party has now succeeded in having Ndzwanana’s decision to disallow the urgent motion of no confidence in himself set aside by the High Court and declared unconstitutional and invalid.

Judge Nelisa Mali set aside the speaker’s decision in its entirety.

She substituted Ndzwanana’s decision with an order that he is prohibited from chairing, adjourning and/or interfering, whether directly or indirectly, with the functioning of the special council meeting.

The judge ordered Tshwane city manager Johann Mettler, or a designated person from Gauteng Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs MEC Jacob Mamabolo, to preside over the election of an acting speaker.

“The acting speaker elected at the special council meeting must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the motion of no confidence in the speaker is considered and decided by council during the meeting,” Judge Mali ordered in her judgment handed down last Friday.

She added that the decision by Ndzwanana, in his capacity as the speaker, during another special council meeting held on July 29, 2023, to disallow an urgent motion of no confidence in himself and adjourn the special council meeting is set aside and declared unconstitutional and invalid in its entirety.

In his defence, Ndzwanana said the notice for the meeting was flawed based on the “doctored signatures” resulting in a lack of majority his ability to assess the appropriateness of the request for purposes of the rules was impeded.

He added that there was no need for him to table the motion at all since the notice did not meet the requirements.

Ndzwanana also indicated that councillors were instructed that the motion of no confidence vote be done by the show of hands.

Judge Mali found that his decision was irrational due to the proceedings not being consistent with democracy, which alone renders the process undemocratic, and that ActionSA acted within the parameters of the section of the Municipal Structures Act authorising the speaker’s removal by resolution.

”The speaker’s (Ndzwanana’s) refusal to recuse himself and further taking irrational decisions is a definite harm and injury to the successful running of the first respondent (City of Tshwane),” the judge explained.

Ndzwanana did not respond to requests for comment on Saturday, and ActionSA Tshwane caucus spokesperson Tshepiso Modiba also failed to indicate what the party’s next course of action would be.

[email protected]