The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Matlosana Local Municipality has announced it will lay criminal charges against councillors who voted in favour of what it describes as an unlawful resolution to reinstate the municipality’s dismissed chief financial officer (CFO), Mercy Phetla.

The charges will be brought under Section 119 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, following a marathon council meeting on February 4, 2026 that the DA says crossed a clear legal line.

At the centre of the dispute is an attempt by a faction of the ANC, supported by the EFF, ACDP and Patriotic Alliance (PA), to overturn the outcome of a completed disciplinary process against Phetla, who had been dismissed and faces allegations of misconduct.

According to the DA, the move flies directly in the face of the Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers, which explicitly state that once a presiding officer has made a determination, the council has no authority to interfere.

That position, the party says, was reinforced by a written explanation from the presiding officer, who warned council in advance that his ruling was lawful, final and binding, and that council had no jurisdiction over the matter.

Despite this, the parties involved, led by the council’s single whip, Rose Tabanchu, proposed that the council reject the presiding officer’s finding simply because they disagreed with the outcome and the process followed. The proposal was put to a vote and passed by a majority.

The DA says it formally warned council during the meeting that it could not lawfully act as an appeal body and that allowing debate on the issue would itself be irregular. Those warnings were ignored, and the speaker of council allowed the discussion and vote to proceed.

In terms of the regulations, section 12(3)(a) requires that the municipality implement the sanction imposed by the presiding officer. Any attempt to cancel that outcome or reinstate the official, the DA argues, amounts to an illegal administrative action.

The resolution, as adopted, instructs the municipal manager to cancel the disciplinary outcome and issue Phetla with a letter allowing her to return to work. The DA has warned that any attempt to implement this decision would be unlawful and could expose the municipal manager to serious legal consequences.

“The council does not have the power to interfere in this process. What we saw was a deliberate decision to ignore the law after councillors were clearly warned, both by the presiding officer in writing and by the DA during the meeting,” said DA caucus leader in Matlosana, Gerhard Strydom.

Strydom said the criminal case will be opened once the official minutes of the meeting become available, which is expected in the coming days. While the DA has not yet named individual councillors, it confirmed that members of the ANC, EFF, ACDP and PA supported the resolution.

An insider has informed IOL that the DA is correct with its intentions, as what council did is an illegal resolution. The source said once a court or similar sitting makes a determination, the council can only go through an alternative process, either it being the CCMA or bargaining council.

“The law doesn’t allow the council to question the report. It just has to take cognisance of it. They don’t review a matter before the court. The make-up of that Disciplinary Committee which found her guilty is that of a court. That process of the DC could have been in favour of or against, but it ruled against. The DA wants to open a case against each councillor who voted in favour of her return. The council doesn’t have powers to do that,” said the source.

It has been established that during the marathon meeting, councillors debated a report confirming the dismissal of Phetla. The report flowed from a formal disciplinary process that had already been concluded. An independent presiding officer had found the CFO guilty and imposed a sanction, which the municipal manager then implemented by issuing a termination letter, as required by law.

When the matter came before council, councillors were split. One group argued that the report should simply be noted, meaning the council would acknowledge the outcome and allow the dismissal to stand.

Another group argued that the report should be rejected because they were unhappy with the process and the outcome. 

Council does not act as an appeal body. It has no power to overturn, amend or reject the outcome of a disciplinary hearing. 

The situation mirrors a 2019 case in Nelson Mandela Bay, where the High Court in the Eastern Cape confirmed that councils do not have appellate powers over senior municipal managers’ disciplinary decisions. The court ruled that such actions are administrative, not political, and must be implemented by the municipal manager or city manager acting on behalf of the municipality.

The court considered the relevant legislative framework, the employment contract, and applicable case law. It was held that the disciplinary process and implementation of sanctions against senior managers are administrative actions vested in the municipal manager or city manager, acting on behalf of the municipality.

Beyond criminal charges, the DA has also warned of possible civil consequences. Should a court application be brought to review and set aside the resolution, councillors who voted for the decision could be held personally liable for the legal costs.

The party says it will oppose any attempt to implement the resolution and will pursue all available legal avenues to have it overturned.

“This was not something that happened quietly in back rooms,” Strydom said. “It happened in full view of the public, in the council chamber. Councillors raised their hands to break the law after being warned that what they were doing was unlawful.”

He added that the incident raises serious concerns about governance in Matlosana and the lengths to which some political actors are willing to go to protect allies, even at the expense of the law.

The municipality has not yet responded publicly to the DA’s announcement. Municipal manager, Lesego Seametsa and Spokesperson, Ntswaki Makgetha, did not respond to questions sent to them.

karabo.ngoepe@inl.co.za 

Source link