Arguments over the removal of Tshwane speaker and mayor set for Thursday
Arguments regarding the Tshwane council meeting which removed speaker Katlego Mathebe and mayor Stevens Mokgalapa will now be heard on Thursday.
Judge Neil Tuchten stood the matter down in the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on Tuesday until December 19.
This is to allow the ANC’s legal representatives to file replying affidavit after they informed the court that they had not received such from a new application brought by four Tshwane councillors.
The new application is from Mathebe, Mokgalapa, deputy speaker Zwelibanzi Khumalo and acting mayor Abel Tau to nullify the council decision taken at a meeting on December 5.
In that meeting, Mathebe and Mokgalapa were voted out in chaotic fashion, something the DA described as nothing but a coup.
The DA has already filed its own application to nullify the decisions of that meeting. Just a day after the dramatic meeting, the high court granted the DA an interim order suspending the council decisions until all parties get a chance to argue their case.
All parties have agreed that the interim order should be extended while the court’s decision on the matter is still pending.
But Tuchten indicated that the matter needed to be concluded urgently. “The matter deserves to be heard. There is a lot of public interest on it…” he said.
The collapse of the relationship between the EFF and the DA in Tshwane has brought drama in council over the past few months.
An announcement by the EFF a few months ago that it would no longer vote with the DA in Tshwane and other metros opened up an opportunity for the ANC to have a go at regaining Tshwane. Things even got worse for the DA when Mokgalapa was forced to go on special leave following a sex scandal.
Since then, the ANC and the EFF have been trying to get Mokgalapa and Mathebe removed from their positions, arguing that they have failed in their duties. In November, Mathebe angered the ANC and EFF when she rejected a motion of no confidence on Mokgalapa, arguing that the motion was advancing a mere “argument and opinion”.
Her decision angered the EFF and the ANC, who even wrote to her during proceedings threatening to take legal action should she not allow the motion to be tabled before council.
Would you like to comment on this article or view other readers' comments? Register (it’s quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.