Sigidla Ndumo v The Minister of Arts and Culture and Others

The appellant, a long-term resident of Grahamstown and co-ordinator of the Keep Grahamstown Grahamstown (KGG) campaign, sought to review and set aside two decisions of the Minister of Arts and Culture made under s 10 of the South African Geographical Names Council Act 118 of 1998. The decisions approved the renaming of the town Grahamstown to Makhanda and rejected the appellant’s objection to that approval. The appellant contended that the renaming process was procedurally unfair and unlawful, particularly alleging inadequate consultation with affected communities and stakeholders, failure to consider earlier consultative processes conducted between 2007 and 2013 (which showed strong opposition to a name change), bias, factual errors, and non-compliance with statutory and guideline requirements. The respondents maintained that a new and independent renaming process commenced in 2015 following applications by individuals, that the statutory procedures and guidelines were followed, and that the appellant and KGG were invited but chose not to participate in the consultative meetings.

The appeal was dismissed. No adverse costs order was made against the appellant, applying the Biowatch principle.

This case reaffirms the application of PAJA principles to challenges against geographical name changes and clarifies the scope of required public consultation under the South African Geographical Names Council Act. It underscores that adequate consultation does not require universal consensus, that prior informal or abandoned processes do not bind subsequent lawful processes, and that parties who elect not to participate in consultative processes may weaken later review challenges. The judgment also confirms judicial deference to administrative decision-making where statutory procedures are substantially complied with.