The applicants were individuals intending to stand as independent candidates in municipal by-elections in various wards of the Tlokwe Municipality, North West Province. As independent candidates, they were required under the Local Government: Municipal Electoral Act 27 of 2000 to submit nomination documents, including Appendix 8 containing at least 50 valid voter signatures from the relevant ward. The applicants approached an official of the Electoral Commission (the second respondent) well before the cut-off date to ensure compliance with the requirements. Although their documents were submitted timeously, the Commission rejected their nominations on the basis of alleged non-compliance with Appendix 8. In the case of the first applicant, the Commission later conceded that the rejection was due to a clerical error. The remaining applicants were excluded without being advised of alleged defects or given an opportunity to rectify them. The applicants contended that the failure of the Commission’s official to assist and advise them resulted in their unfair exclusion, rendering the by-elections not free and fair. They sought postponement of the affected by-elections, permission to register as candidates, and an investigation into the conduct of the official concerned.
The Electoral Commission was ordered to request the MEC for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs to postpone the by-elections in wards 1, 4, 11, 12 and 20 of the Tlokwe Municipality. The Commission was ordered to conduct a full investigation into the conduct of the second respondent. The second to sixth applicants were permitted to register as candidates in their respective wards in the postponed by-elections. By-elections in unaffected wards were allowed to proceed as scheduled.
This case is significant for clarifying the proactive duties of the Electoral Commission in South African election law. It affirms that the Commission must actively facilitate participation by both voters and candidates, particularly independent candidates, and that failures by election officials can undermine the freeness and fairness of elections. The judgment strengthens constitutional principles of enfranchisement, administrative fairness, and participatory democracy in the electoral context.