Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
R/€ = 20.50 Change: -0.45
R/$ = 19.01 Change: -0.54
Au 1618.74 $/oz Change: 26.60
Pt 719.83 $/oz Change: -5.05
 
 
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
R/€ = 20.50 Change: -0.45
R/$ = 19.01 Change: -0.54
Au 1618.74 $/oz Change: 26.60
Pt 719.83 $/oz Change: -5.05
 
 
BACK

Unemployed Peoples Movement v Premier, Province of the Eastern Cape and Others (553/2019) [2020] ZAECGHC 1

17th January 2020

Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

[1]      This is an opposed application brought by the Unemployed Peoples Movement ("the UPM") for the following relief:

Advertisement

a.   Declaring that Makana Municipality ("Makana")[1] is in breach of section 152 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ("the Constitution") in that it has failed to ensure the provision of services to its community in a sustainable manner and has failed to promote a safe and healthy environment;

b.     Declaring that Makana is in breach of section 153(a) of the Constitution in that it has failed to structure and manage its administration, budgeting and planning processes in order to give priority to basic needs and promote the social and economic development of its community;

Advertisement

c.     Declaring that all the jurisdictional facts for mandatory intervention in terms of section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution and sections 139 and 140 of the Local Government Municipal Finance Management Act 56 of 2003 ("the MFMA'') are present at Makana;

d.     Directing the second respondent (the Executive Council for the Province of the Eastern Cape), to intervene in terms of section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution read with section 139 and 140 of the MFMA and to inter alia appoint a competent and experienced administrator for Makana forthwith;

e.   Directing the eighth, ninth and tenth respondents (Makana, its mayor and

its municipal manager), and any other respondents opposing the application to pay joint and several costs of suit, the one paying the other to be absolved, including the cost of three counsel on the attorney and client scale.

[2]      The  fifth,  seventh, 11th ,12th ,13th and 15th respondents do not oppose the

application. The application is opposed by the first four respondents (referred to as "the provincial respondents or provincial government"), the sixth respondent (the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, hereinafter referred to as "CoGTA"), and the eighth, ninth, tenth and 14th respondents (hereinafter referred to as "the municipal respondents or local government"). 

EDITED BY: Creamer Media Reporter
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE ARTICLE ENQUIRY
Advertisement
 
 
Prev Next