…as councillors’ court challenge stalls 31 October polls
Moorosi Tsiane
THE Revolution for Prosperity (RFP) has indefinitely suspended its planned constituency elections following a High Court application by two councillors challenging the party leadership’s electoral arrangements.
The party had scheduled the elections for 31 October 2026, but secretary general Nthati Moorosi announced on Thursday that the polls could not proceed while the court challenge remained pending.
In a circular to party members, Ms Moorosi said a new election date would be announced in due course.
“Members are hereby notified that we cannot proceed with the constituency committee elections on 31 October 2026 as planned. This due to the case which is before court, challenging the procedure prescribing how elections ought to be conducted. A new date will be announced in due course,” Ms Moorosi said.
The pending court application was filed on 18 September by Bobatsi constituency public relations officer and councillor Mothibeli Hure and Braakfontein councillor Malimpho Lebenya.
The two are challenging a circular issued by the party on 14 September calling for constituency elective conferences, which were intended to pave the way for the October elections.
In their application, the councillors accuse the RFP leadership of violating the party constitution through provisions governing who can contest and participate in the elections.
The RFP, its national executive committee and Ms Moorosi are cited as the first to third respondents respectively.
Mr Hure, in his founding affidavit, says he became aware of the circular when it was published on 15 September and was concerned by provisions determining who could contest and vote in the elections.
He has specifically taken issue with paragraph five of the circular, which he said excluded councillors from contesting positions on constituency committees.
“I must state that the said Circular on its paragraph 5 clearly excludes the Councillors from contesting in the said elections,” Mr Hure says.
He argues the exclusion is discriminatory and infringed on rights provided for under Section 9(c) of the RFP Constitution.
He says he wants to exercise his right to participate in the party’s electoral processes and to be appointed or deployed to a committee.
“There is no explanation why my right is to be abridged and respondents never bothered to even consult me and others in my position like the second applicant before this crucial and adverse decision was taken,” he says.
Mr Hure further contends that the circular effectively seeks to amend the RFP constitution by increasing the number of members of a constituency committee from seven to 11.
He argues that Section 26(c) of the party constitution provides for seven members, while the circular provides for the election of 11.
“The adjustment of members of the committee is an amendment to the constitution and which amendment ought to have followed the provisions of section 33 of the (RFP) constitution.”
According to Mr Hure, section 33 requires constitutional amendments to be dealt with through an Annual General Meeting or a special meeting convened specifically for that purpose.
Mr Hure and Ms Lebenya are also challenging a requirement that sitting constituency committee members who wish to contest the upcoming elections should first resign.
Mr Hure argues that this created another constitutional problem because constituency committees are responsible for running the affairs of the party at constituency level.
“In the instance now that members have resigned, even the very intended elections will not materialise smoothly as there would not be anyone legally mandated by the constitution to facilitate for the holding of the said elections.”
The applicants have also questioned the composition of delegates entitled to participate in the elective conferences.
Mr Hure argues that the circular excludes ordinary branch members who are not committee members from participating, despite what he says are broader participation rights under Section 9(c) of the party constitution.
He maintains that the circular was therefore inconsistent with the party’s governing constitution.
“The circular is in material respect inconsistent with the constitution,” Mr Hure says.
The applicants have asked the court to grant them interim relief stopping the constituency election process pending the final determination of their application.
Mr Hure says the urgency was driven by the timetable contained in the circular, particularly the 20 September deadline for councillors wishing to contest the elections to resign from their positions.
He says he would also have to relinquish his position as Bobatsi constituency PRO in order to qualify.
“Before the 20 September I must also have resigned as the PRO for the Bobatsi Constituency so that I could be eligible to contest the elections.”
Mr Hure warns that waiting for the ordinary court process could render their challenge meaningless because the elections were scheduled for 31 October 2026.
“Once the elections have passed, I would have lost my chance to participate in these elections at least for this term.”
The applicants are consequently asking the court to suspend implementation of the circular while the legality of the electoral arrangements is determined.
In their final relief, they want the court to declare the circular issued by the RFP Secretary General unlawful on the grounds that it does not comply with the party’s constitution.