The latest stunt by the DA to challenge the PR lists of ActionSA, along with those of other parties, is a desperate attempt by the DA to disenfranchise voters they simply cannot win in South Africa. The provision that the DA challenges in the Municipal Electoral Act makes provision for parties to legally supplement their lists without any limitation on how they elect to do so. It is a practice that has been followed by many political parties over multiple Local Government Elections, including by the DA itself.
It is important to note that ActionSA’s Candidate Selection Policies, which are publicly available, ensure that the PR list is supplemented after the election by ward candidates in descending order of performance. This was designed so that it is the South African people who determine the order of our PR list based on the merit of our ward candidates, their vision for service delivery, and the effectiveness of their campaigns. When compared to the smoke-filled rooms of the DA’s Federal Executive or ANC NEC, this is by far the most transparent and democratic way of populating a PR list.
The DA’s legal case must be treated with cynicism, given that they have never challenged this in any election in which this legal provision has been utilised by many parties, including their own. Not only has the DA never sought to amend this legislation in the many years they have served in Parliament, but also, over the last two years, where they have been part of a majority GNU government and held the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the portfolio from which all electoral legislation emanates, no steps have been taken to amend this legislation. Rather, the DA has waited for candidate nominations to close to challenge this long-standing piece of legislation, used in multiple elections, and has insidiously asked the Electoral Court to prevent ActionSA from supplementing its lists after the elections, or only being able to supplement them after the first council meeting to elect mayors and governments. So while the DA’s court case wraps itself in the concern of disenfranchising South Africans, it seeks to do exactly that by having all of the votes cast for parties like ActionSA transferred to other parties, including themselves, against the will of the South African people.
In addition to being hypocritical, the DA is also incompetent in that it has failed to recognise that it too has used this provision in the Municipal Electoral Act to supplement its PR lists in previous elections and in these 2026 Local Government Elections.
In 2026, they have submitted one-seat lists in the following municipalities:
- Ntabankulu
- Umzumbe
- Mkhambathini
- Nqutu
- Msinga
- uMvoti
- eDumbe
- Nongoma
- Ulundi
- Big Five Hlabisa
- Mfolozi
- Maphumulo
It is unclear how it is that the DA intends to take political parties to court over a practice that they have not only used in prior elections themselves, but that they intend to use in this election as well. ActionSA is also in possession of correspondence issued by the Democratic Alliance in KwaZulu-Natal to the National Freedom Party in the 2016 Local Government Elections, in which they offered the NFP seats in municipal councils in which it failed to register for those elections through supplementing its own PR list through the same legal provision.
The below provision of the Municipal Electoral Act provides for the supplementation of a party’s PR list and does not place any limitations or conditionalities on how parties select to supplement their lists:
“If a party list contains fewer candidates than the party is entitled to, the Electoral Commission must in writing immediately notify the party of the exact shortfall and request the party to deliver within two days of the notice a list supplemented by the name or names of one or more eligible candidates.”
The essence of the Democratic Alliance’s court case is to read things into these provisions of the Municipal Electoral Act that the legislators simply did not include.
The fact that the Democratic Alliance would elect to use its considerable time and money to pursue a legal case that will disenfranchise millions of South Africans and have their votes transferred to other political parties, including themselves, should be condemned in the strongest terms. It is clear that, contrary to the fantastical projections of DA-aligned pollsters, the DA clearly cannot grow its support or get the majority of South Africans to trust them. This move, which reminds the South African people of their painful past, including the DA’s ancestry with a qualified franchise, is affirmation for the majority of South Africans that the DA wants to pursue minority rule.
ActionSA is prepared to meet this disgusting legal action head-on and will ask the courts to punish the DA for this flagrant abuse of the court’s time at a time in which everyone’s energy should be focused on ensuring free and fair elections in which no South African is disenfranchised. ActionSA does, however, take comfort from the DA’s desperation in the old adage, “Inja ayikonkhothi imoto emile”.
Electoral Court Challenge: DA Runs Out of Ideas and Moves to Disenfranchise Voters They Will Never Win
The latest stunt by the DA to challenge the PR lists of ActionSA, along with those of other parties, is a desperate attempt by the DA to disenfranchise voters they simply cannot win in South Africa. The provision that the DA challenges in the Municipal Electoral Act makes provision for parties to legally supplement their lists without any limitation on how they elect to do so. It is a practice that has been followed by many political parties over multiple Local Government Elections, including by the DA itself.
It is important to note that ActionSA’s Candidate Selection Policies, which are publicly available, ensure that the PR list is supplemented after the election by ward candidates in descending order of performance. This was designed so that it is the South African people who determine the order of our PR list based on the merit of our ward candidates, their vision for service delivery, and the effectiveness of their campaigns. When compared to the smoke-filled rooms of the DA’s Federal Executive or ANC NEC, this is by far the most transparent and democratic way of populating a PR list.
The DA’s legal case must be treated with cynicism, given that they have never challenged this in any election in which this legal provision has been utilised by many parties, including their own. Not only has the DA never sought to amend this legislation in the many years they have served in Parliament, but also, over the last two years, where they have been part of a majority GNU government and held the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the portfolio from which all electoral legislation emanates, no steps have been taken to amend this legislation. Rather, the DA has waited for candidate nominations to close to challenge this long-standing piece of legislation, used in multiple elections, and has insidiously asked the Electoral Court to prevent ActionSA from supplementing its lists after the elections, or only being able to supplement them after the first council meeting to elect mayors and governments. So while the DA’s court case wraps itself in the concern of disenfranchising South Africans, it seeks to do exactly that by having all of the votes cast for parties like ActionSA transferred to other parties, including themselves, against the will of the South African people.
In addition to being hypocritical, the DA is also incompetent in that it has failed to recognise that it too has used this provision in the Municipal Electoral Act to supplement its PR lists in previous elections and in these 2026 Local Government Elections.
In 2026, they have submitted one-seat lists in the following municipalities:
It is unclear how it is that the DA intends to take political parties to court over a practice that they have not only used in prior elections themselves, but that they intend to use in this election as well. ActionSA is also in possession of correspondence issued by the Democratic Alliance in KwaZulu-Natal to the National Freedom Party in the 2016 Local Government Elections, in which they offered the NFP seats in municipal councils in which it failed to register for those elections through supplementing its own PR list through the same legal provision.
The below provision of the Municipal Electoral Act provides for the supplementation of a party’s PR list and does not place any limitations or conditionalities on how parties select to supplement their lists:
“If a party list contains fewer candidates than the party is entitled to, the Electoral Commission must in writing immediately notify the party of the exact shortfall and request the party to deliver within two days of the notice a list supplemented by the name or names of one or more eligible candidates.”
The essence of the Democratic Alliance’s court case is to read things into these provisions of the Municipal Electoral Act that the legislators simply did not include.
The fact that the Democratic Alliance would elect to use its considerable time and money to pursue a legal case that will disenfranchise millions of South Africans and have their votes transferred to other political parties, including themselves, should be condemned in the strongest terms. It is clear that, contrary to the fantastical projections of DA-aligned pollsters, the DA clearly cannot grow its support or get the majority of South Africans to trust them. This move, which reminds the South African people of their painful past, including the DA’s ancestry with a qualified franchise, is affirmation for the majority of South Africans that the DA wants to pursue minority rule.
ActionSA is prepared to meet this disgusting legal action head-on and will ask the courts to punish the DA for this flagrant abuse of the court’s time at a time in which everyone’s energy should be focused on ensuring free and fair elections in which no South African is disenfranchised. ActionSA does, however, take comfort from the DA’s desperation in the old adage, “Inja ayikonkhothi imoto emile”.