Open Secrets and Another v Minister of Finance and Others (55493/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 670 (17 November 2020)

Open Secrets and Another v Minister of Finance and Others (55493/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 670 (17 November 2020)

The court found that the applicants failed to satisfy the requirements of urgency for interim relief. They did not participate in the public consultation process for the Regulations nor request information via PAIA before approaching the court. The appointment criteria are publicly available, and the process includes publication of shortlisted candidates and a comprehensive report. The court held that the minimum level of transparency required by the Constitution has been met and that the circumstances do not justify judicial intervention in the executive's domain at this stage. The applicants did not demonstrate a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, and any challenge to the...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 670
Parties
Applicant: Open Secrets; Applicant: Unpaid Benefits Campaign; Respondent: Minister of Finance; Respondent: Ismail Momoniat N.O.; Respondent: Fundi Tshazibana N.O.; Respondent: Thezi Mabuza N.O.; Respondent: Deon Rossouw N.O.; Respondent: Sizwe Nxasana N.O.; Respondent: Financial Sector Authority
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 November 2020
Case Number
55493/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Relief (part A) and Review Application (part B)
Outcome
Application for interim relief dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Public Participation, Transparency in Appointments, Financial Sector Regulation, Urgency Requirements, Separation of Powers
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Interim Interdict Public Participation Transparency in Appointments Financial Sector Regulation Urgency Requirements Separation of Powers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Open Secrets

Applicant

Unpaid Benefits Campaign

Applicant

Minister of Finance

Respondent

Ismail Momoniat N.O.

Respondent

Fundi Tshazibana N.O.

Respondent

Thezi Mabuza N.O.

Respondent

Deon Rossouw N.O.

Respondent

Sizwe Nxasana N.O.

Respondent

Financial Sector Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Relief (part A) and Review Application (part B)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for interim relief meets the requirements of urgency.
  2. 2 Whether the appointment process for FSCA Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners lacks sufficient transparency.
  3. 3 Whether the Regulations under section 61(4) of the Financial Sector Regulation Act unlawfully exclude public/media access to interviews.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to satisfy the requirements of urgency for interim relief. They did not participate in the public consultation process for the Regulations nor request information via PAIA before approaching the court. The appointment criteria are publicly available, and the process includes publication of shortlisted candidates and a comprehensive report. The court held that the minimum level of transparency required by the Constitution has been met and that the circumstances do not justify judicial intervention in the executive's domain at this stage. The applicants did not demonstrate a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, and any challenge to the...

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application for interim relief is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.