Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
R/€ = 20.57 Change: -0.52
R/$ = 19.05 Change: -0.58
Au 1618.31 $/oz Change: 26.17
Pt 719.82 $/oz Change: -5.06
 
 
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
R/€ = 20.57 Change: -0.52
R/$ = 19.05 Change: -0.58
Au 1618.31 $/oz Change: 26.17
Pt 719.82 $/oz Change: -5.06
 
 
BACK

Democratic Alliance v Electoral Commission of South Africa and Others (007/2019) [2019] ZAEC 2

21st June 2019

Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

[1] The applicant is the Democratic Alliance (the DA), a political party, registered pursuant to the provisions of the Electoral Commission Act (the ECA).[1] The first Respondent is the Electoral Commission (the Commission), a body established pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Constitution, and which conducts itself in terms of the Electoral Commission Act.[2] The second respondent is the GOOD Party (GOOD), a political party registered pursuant to the provisions of the ECA. The third respondent is the African National Congress (the ANC), a political party registered pursuant to the provisions of the ECA.

Advertisement

[2] The applicant sought to review two decisions taken by the Commission in the prelude to the general elections, which were held on 8 May 2019. The first decision (the GOOD decision) concerned a finding by the Commission that the applicant had violated Item 9(1)(b) of the Electoral Code of Conduct annexed to Schedule 2 of the Electoral Act[3] (the Code) by making a false statement that the applicant had 'fired' Ms. Patricia de Lille, now a member of GOOD. The second review concerns a decision taken on 15 April 2019 directing the applicant to 'cease and desist from making any further false statements in relation to Ms. Patricia de Lille being 'fired from the [applicant]' and to issue an apology for the false statement it published in respect of Ms. De Lille. These two decisions are referred to as the GOOD decision. The applicant also sought to review and set aside the Commission's decision, taken on 4 April 2019, not to investigate the applicant's complaint against the ANC's statement that the applicant had made a profit of R1 billion from water tariffs in the city of Cape Town (the DA - ANG decision). 

For more information on this article, please make use of the Article Enquiry Service, by clicking here
 
Advertisement
EDITED BY: Creamer Media Reporter
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE ARTICLE ENQUIRY
Advertisement
 
 
Prev Next