A Legal Dead End: Supreme Court of Appeal Dismisses DA’s Fight Over Knysna Appointments

A long-running political and legal battle in the Garden Route has reached its final chapter. The Supreme Court of Appeal has firmly closed the door on the Democratic Alliance’s fight to overturn a set of controversial staff appointments in Knysna, delivering a stinging rebuke by dismissing the case as not being “in the interest of justice.”

The ruling brings a decisive end to a dispute that began in 2022, highlighting the fierce political tensions within the ANC-led coalition council and the limits of legal intervention in expired political disputes.

The Root of the Political Feud

The conflict erupted when the governing coalition in Knysna created eight temporary support staff positions for the offices of the mayor, deputy mayor, and speaker. The DA, then in opposition, cried foul. Led by former councillor Julie Lopes, the party argued that the appointments were unlawful, violated municipal staffing regulations, and were pushed through without proper consideration of the budget or standard recruitment procedures.

The DA swiftly took the matter to the Western Cape High Court, seeking an urgent interdict. The court initially blocked the municipality from paying the new staff members, but this order was short-lived. Despite the legal challenge, the council managed to pay the appointees for October before their contracts were vacated at the end of November 2022.

Why the Courts Declined to Rule

The DA’s case faced a fundamental legal obstacle: timing. By the time the matter received a full hearing in the High Court, the six-month contracts had already expired. The court dismissed the application, stating the issue was “moot” because the positions no longer existed and no practical relief could be granted.

Undeterred, the DA took the fight to the Supreme Court of Appeal, arguing the principle of the matter was vital to hold the council accountable for potential irregular expenditure. However, the SCA agreed with the lower court’s reasoning.

Judge Fayeeza Kathree-Setiloane stated clearly that courts cannot issue advisory opinions on hypothetical or future disputes. With the contracts long over and no evidence that the municipality planned to revive the posts, there was simply no live issue for the court to decide. The appeal was dismissed with costs, a final financial and legal blow to the DA’s efforts.

The Lasting Political Impact

While the legal journey is over, the political ramifications linger. The case exposed the raw nerves of coalition politics in the town and set a precedent for how similar disputes might be handled. The ruling underscores that courts will often sidestep介入 (jièrù – intervene in) matters that have no continuing practical consequence, pushing political battles back into the political arena where they began.

For the residents of Knysna, the episode is a closed, albeit costly, chapter in the town’s governance. For the DA, it is a stark lesson in the legal principle of mootness, where even a strong belief in wrongdoing cannot compel a judicial ruling if the tangible conflict has already evaporated.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com