Siyathemba Community Movement (SGB) v Independent Electoral Commission and Others

The Siyathemba Community Movement (SCM), a registered political party, participated in the 1 November 2021 local elections and won ward 2 and obtained three proportional seats. On 20 November 2021, SCM held an inaugural sitting which the third to fifth respondents failed to attend. They also failed to attend a meeting on 21 November 2021 and refused to sign deployment contracts. Despite not signing, they attended and were inaugurated as councillors. On 22 December 2021, a disciplinary hearing was held in their absence and they were expelled from the party. The applicant sought to have the IEC accept the expulsion and amend the party's proportional representative list. The IEC concluded this was an internal leadership dispute and not within its legislative mandate. The applicant's case was brought by Mr R J Februarie claiming to be the elected chairperson, while Mr Phillips was the registered party leader according to IEC records. A parallel case (148/22) was pending before the Northern Cape High Court involving the same parties and issues.

• Whether the applicant had locus standi to bring the application given that Mr Februarie was not the registered party leader
• Whether the IEC was correct in determining that the dispute constituted an internal leadership dispute beyond its mandate
• Whether the application should be dismissed on the basis of lis alibi pendens given the pending High Court matter
• Whether the correct procedure was followed in expelling party members and reporting vacant seats to the Municipal Manager and IEC
• Whether the application was properly constituted in terms of joinder and misjoinder of parties

The application was dismissed. There was no order as to costs.

The binding legal principles established are: (1) The IEC does not have authority under the Electoral Commission Act 51 of 1996 and its Regulations to intervene in internal party leadership disputes or disputes concerning membership status within a political party; (2) Only the registered party leader, as recorded with the IEC in terms of section 15 of the Act and Regulation 9, has authority to bring applications on behalf of a political party or notify the IEC of changes to party particulars; (3) Any change in party particulars must be notified to the Chief Electoral Officer in writing within 30 days by the registered party leader in terms of Regulation 9; (4) Where there are conflicting claims to party leadership and membership, this constitutes an internal dispute beyond the IEC's mandate and must be resolved through internal party processes or by the courts; (5) The procedure under section 27 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act 117 of 1998 read with items 18 and 20 of Schedule 1 must be properly followed when seeking to declare council seats vacant and amend party lists.

The court observed that while the applicant may have had valid reasons for expelling the third to fifth respondents, it appeared that the correct procedure was not followed in effecting the expulsion or in reporting the vacant seats to the Municipal Manager and/or the IEC. The court noted that the matter was similar to the case of Pan Africanist Congress of Azania v Independent Electoral Commission of South Africa and Another [2016] ZAGPPHC 250, which had similar facts and suffered the same fate. The court also commented that it was best for the IEC to stay away from interfering or meddling in internal affairs of political parties other than those germane to the management of elections, and that internal affairs disputes may include disputes of membership or status of a member's standing in the party. The court declared the application frivolous and vexatious given the pending parallel High Court proceedings.

This case affirms the principle that the Independent Electoral Commission lacks the mandate to intervene in internal party disputes concerning membership and leadership. It clarifies the scope and limits of the IEC's powers under the Electoral Commission Act 51 of 1996 and Regulation 9, emphasizing that the IEC must stay away from internal party affairs that do not relate directly to the management of elections. The case also demonstrates the importance of following proper procedures when seeking to expel party members and amend party lists, including compliance with section 27 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act 117 of 1998. It reinforces the requirement that applications must be brought by persons with proper locus standi and authority, particularly the registered party leader as recorded with the IEC.