Having acted as a friend – amicus curiae – of the Constitutional Court in opposing the postponement of this year’s municipal elections, the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) is now considering a motion to return in that capacity to oppose what it describes as ‘the IEC’s latest dereliction’.
The IRR says in a statement that it is considering this in the light of the Electoral Commission’s (IEC) attempt to reopen candidate nominations for municipal elections.
This is being opposed by the DA in papers filed to the Constitutional Court, and has been rejected by the EFF as ultra vires and beyond the IEC’s powers on the basis that once the ConCourt had dismissed the EFF’s own appeal to reopen candidate nominations, the IEC could not grant the same relief to other parties.
The IRR said: “From the beginning, the IRR opposed, and condemned, Cogta Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma’s election ‘proclamation’ on August 3 as an act of voter suppression sabotage. This is the poisoned seed from which has grown a thorny bramble of confusion, mistrust, and democratic dysfunction, which now includes the IEC’s latest error.
“In precise terms, the voter suppression was correctly overturned by the court, which instructed that two changes to the original timetable must be considered: first, that the date of the election could be moved from October 27 to November 1; and, second, that the voters’ roll must be reopened.”
The Institute points out that the ConCourt ruled that any other changes considered ‘reasonably necessary’ to facilitate those two moves are permitted, but no more revision of the election timetable following the August 3 proclamation is allowed. The rest of the timetable, according to the ConCourt’s order, ‘shall…remain applicable’.
IRR head of campaigns Gabriel Crouse said: “The IEC is marching ahead as if it had the power to reinterpret the Constitution willy-nilly, despite the apex court’s order. The IEC makes to burn deadlines like kindling and it must be stopped.”
He added: “Never before has the IEC been so confused about what a deadline is – but we can help explain why hard deadlines are necessary for elections to be fair and update new facts the ConCourt may not otherwise know. We hope that the ConCourt, however reluctantly, will open itself up to the new matter of its order being misinterpreted to ventilate reason, dispel confusion, and once again secure regular, free and fair elections.”