The Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, has set aside a decision by the City of Johannesburg Council to allocate the mayor and some council executives with more VIP protectors than the legislation allows. Picture: Steve Lawrence / Independent Newspapers Archives
A recent court ruling that dealt a blow to the executive of the City of Johannesburg is a step in the right direction according to an economist.
This week, the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, ruled that the city’s VIP protection policy is unconstitutional and invalid.
The policy, adopted in March 2024, allowed for eight bodyguards for the mayor, multiple bodyguards for the speaker, and personal protectors for members of the mayoral committee and committee chairs.
The DA had approached the court, arguing that the policy was unlawful and diverted resources from essential service delivery.
The metro is currently spending R3 million a month on VIP protection with a total of 60 bodyguards and 40 vehicles.
The court found that the policy exceeded the limit set by the Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister (Cogta), Velenkosini Hlabisa, which allows for only two bodyguards for the mayor, deputy mayor, speaker, and whips.
The court also noted that the City Council had not obtained a threat assessment or report from the South African Police Service (SAPS) to justify the policy.
Judge Stuart Wilson suspended his order for six weeks, allowing the city to obtain a threat assessment to justify the policy.
Wilson wrote in his judgment: “The policy still entrenched the provision of far more generous personal protection services to senior municipal councillors than the Act and the ministerial determinations permit… The papers in this case suggest that the City Council might have thought that it could obtain a threat assessment after passing and implementing the 20 March 2024 resolution.
“If the City Council did think that, then it fell into error. Both the Minister’s determinations and the Act require a threat assessment to be conducted before an expansion of security provision beyond the default limits set in the determinations can be implemented.”
Economist and senior lecturer at Stadio Higher Education, Chris Harmse, speaking to Independent Media on Friday, said the court decision was a step in the right direction and good news for the taxpayers.
“The financial effects from an economic view are always the question of opportunity cost… by scrapping the high cost for VIP protection we are able to use the money for other pressing services.
“How many of the temporary teachers that are going to lose their jobs can be employed? How much of that money can be used to build new schools? That money can be used to make sure that the infrastructure and service delivery in Gauteng is up to standard,” Harmse said.
He added that the Gauteng government should always make a choice as to whether they were going to protect the “so-called VIPs” or put the money into other services.
Harmse said that according to him, that was the reason the ANC lost votes during last year’s elections.
“According to me, that’s the reason the ANC did not do well in the elections because those that have a lot keep gaining while those who have nothing keep getting less.
“This has nothing to do with race but it’s about managing the state finances which led to the downfall of the ANC… And this has not only happened here in this country only. It happened in Botswana, look at Namibia where the ruling party just lost almost 40%of their vote… It’s all over the world now where people are starting to argue what the citizens get from the taxes and the spending by the government,” Harmse said.
The DA welcomed the court’s ruling, saying it was a victory for good governance and the rule of law.
ActionSA also welcomed the judgment, and said: “ActionSA was against this policy from the onset, and we even went further to vote against this policy in council. There is already a provision which allows public representatives to apply for necessary protection if they face threats; we believe this provision is sufficient.
“We argued that the resources intended for the VIP Protection should be redirected towards service delivery. However, we understood that the personnel would come from the JMPD pool.
“It is worth noting that the security detail of Cllr Nobuhle Mthembu, the City of Johannesburg Council Speaker, is nowhere near what was stated on the VIP Protection Policy. Cllr Mthembu does not enjoy the luxury of having an entourage and a dozen bodyguards.
“ActionSA believes that public representatives must be accessible to the very community that has voted them into power, rather than creating a barrier between them and the community.“
mashudu.sadike@inl.co.za