South Africa Case Law

African National Congress v Democratic Alliance and Another (11535/2014)

African National Congress v Democratic Alliance and Another (11535/2014) [2014] ZAGPJHC 58; 2014 (3) SA 608 (GJ) (4 April 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

11535/2014

Judge

Hellens

The court found that the SMS sent by the Democratic Alliance, stating that the Nkandla Report shows how President Zuma stole R246m to build his home, did not constitute a breach of section 89(2)(c) of the Electoral Act or item 9(1)(b)(ii) of the Electoral Code. The court held that the SMS was a form of fair comment, protected under the principles of freedom of expression and robust political debate, especially in the context of an election. The findings of the Public Protector's Nkandla Report, while not explicitly stating that President Zuma committed theft, detailed maladministration, unlaw…

Source excerpt

• Electoral Act Interpretation
• Freedom Of Expression
• Electoral Code Of Conduct
• Fair Comment
• Political Campaigning

Buthelezi v MEC for Co-Operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Kwazulu-Natal and Others (995/2012)

Buthelezi v MEC for Co-Operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Kwazulu-Natal and Others (995/2012) [2012] ZAKZPHC 71 (2 March 2012)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

995/2012

Judge

Gorven

The High Court dismissed an urgent challenge to Traditional Council elections, holding that Regulation 25(2) did not require strict application of Chapter 2 of the Electoral Act.

• Traditional Leadership Regulations
• Electoral Act Interpretation
• Voters Roll Compilation
• Declaratory Relief
• Interdict Proceedings
• Traditional-leadership

African National Congress v Chief Electoral Officer of the Independent Electoral Commission (CCT 45/09)

African National Congress v Chief Electoral Officer of the Independent Electoral Commission (CCT 45/09) [2009] ZACC 13; 2009 (10) BCLR 971 (CC) ; 2010 (5) SA 487 (CC) (3 June 2009)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 45/09

Judges

Moseneke, Cameron, Mokgoro, Ngcobo, Nkabinde, O'Regan, Skweyiya, Van der Westhuizen

The Constitutional Court held that section 96(1) of the Electoral Act does not oust its jurisdiction in constitutional matters, as such an interpretation would be inconsistent with section 167(3)(a) of the Constitution. The Court found that Mr Maluleka was indeed registered on the voters' roll, and the objection by the Chief Electoral Officer was based on a misunderstanding arising from two identity documents with different numbers. The Electoral Court's decision unjustifiably infringed Mr Maluleka's constitutional right to stand for election under section 19(3)(b) of the Constitution. The ur…

Source excerpt

• Electoral Act Interpretation
• Right To Stand For Election
• Jurisdiction Of Constitutional Court
• Urgent Application
• Voters Roll Qualification

Richter v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (4044/09)

Richter v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (4044/09) [2009] ZAGPHC 21; [2009] 2 All SA 390 (T) (9 February 2009)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

4044/09

Judge

Ebersohn

The court held that section 33 of the Electoral Act and related regulations unconstitutionally discriminate against certain categories of South African citizens abroad by denying them the right to apply for special votes. The differentiation between government employees and other citizens abroad is arbitrary, lacks rational connection to a legitimate government purpose, and cannot be justified under section 36 of the Constitution. The exclusion impairs dignity, equality, and the right to vote, which are foundational values of the Constitution. The court found that the limitation is not reason…

Source excerpt

• Right To Vote
• Equality Clause
• Special Votes
• Unfair Discrimination
• Limitation Of Rights
• Electoral Act Interpretation

August and Another v Electoral Commission and Others (CCT8/99)

August and Another v Electoral Commission and Others (CCT8/99) [1999] ZACC 3; 1999 (3) SA 1; 1999 (4) BCLR 363 (1 April 1999)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT8/99

Judges

Sachs, Chaskalson, Langa, Ackermann, Goldstone, Madala, Mokgoro, O'Regan, Yacoob

The Constitutional Court held that, in the absence of any legislative provision disqualifying prisoners from voting, all prisoners retain the constitutional right to register and vote. The Electoral Commission is under a positive obligation to take reasonable steps to facilitate the registration and voting of eligible prisoners. The phrase 'ordinarily resident' in the Electoral Act must be interpreted to include prisoners as ordinarily resident in prison for the purposes of registration. The failure of the Commission to make arrangements for prisoners to register and vote constitutes a threat…

Source excerpt

• Right To Vote
• Universal Suffrage
• Equality Before Law
• Enfranchisement
• Electoral Act Interpretation