Mavundla in court to fight his dismissal as eThekwini deputy mayor

The ongoing court battle between the eThekwini municipality and ousted deputy mayor Philani Mavundla is set to continue after Christmas after the latest court action was adjourned until next Thursday.

The Durban high court on Friday heard Mavundla's application to review and set aside the city council's decision to remove him as a member of the executive committee and deputy mayor. 

Mavundla wants the court to enforce the interim interdict granted by judge Philip Nkosi in the same court on December 12 that barred the council from entertaining the motion to remove him without complying with its own rules.

Nkosi ruled it would be next to impossible to give Mavundla enough notice to “galvanise other parties” and political parties enough time to deliberate and form a view on the motion, since the council meeting was to sit in less than 24 hours (after his order).

Council speaker Thabani Nyawose felt he had done enough to satisfy the rules that deal with the removal of a deputy mayor. Nyawose allowed the motion to go ahead and the majority of the council voted in favour of removing Mavundla on December 13.

Aggrieved by the decision, Mavundla went back to court on December 15 asking it to hold the speaker and the council in contempt of the court order. 

In his founding affidavit, Mavundla maintained his ousting was unlawful and sought to interdict the implementation of the decision.

Cited as the first respondent, Nyawose maintained in his answering affidavit that there was no foul play in Mavundla’s dismissal.

“It is also respectfully submitted that any harm that may have been suffered by virtue of (Mavundla's) removal as a member of the executive committee and as the deputy mayor, can be rectified in the event of him being successful in his review application by simply reinstating him to such positions.”

Nyawose said rules did not specify the amount of time the concerned party (Mavundla) should be given but the speaker must receive the notice of the motion at least 24 hours before the meeting.

Though the notice was only given 16 hours before the meeting, Nyawose said the motion was debated at length and no issues were raised regarding the notice or allegations of prejudice.

In his replying affidavit, Mavundla conceded that no notice period was stipulated. However, he maintained that all members of council should be given sufficient notice to be “aware and consider the motion before it is tabled for discussion”.

“Additionally, it must be sufficient to provide council members with an opportunity to engage meaningfully in the ensuing debate before the resolution is taken,” he said.

Nkosi determined that at the stage he delivered his judgment, it was too late for the motion to be placed on the agenda for consideration by the council at the meeting of December 13.

On Friday, Nyawose’s representatives told judge Mokgere Masipa this was a political matter, not a legal one, because it dealt with the relationship between the ANC and Mavundla. They alleged Mavundla was “looking for a legal relief to a political issue”.

However, Mavundla’s representatives argued it was the “contractual relationship” between Mavundla and the ANC that was debated, thus it was a legal issue.

They also argued that the council rules called for a minimum of 10 councillors at any given time and with the removal of Mavundla there were nine councillors.

Masipa adjourned Mavundla's application until Thursday.

TimesLIVE