The Democratic Alliance (DA) has approached the Electoral Court to challenge the decision by several political parties to submit only one proportional representative (PR) candidate in some municipalities ahead of the 2026 local government elections. The parties in question, including the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), MK Party, ActionSA, and Good, have opted to list only one PR candidate in some municipalities, taking advantage of legislation that allows them to supplement their lists after the elections if they win more seats.
According to the DA, this approach is an attempt to dupe voters by not disclosing a full list of candidates. The party's federal council chair, Ashor Sarupen, said that the DA has challenged this tactic, asking the Electoral Court to decide whether it is permissible. Sarupen argued that the courts have consistently held that voters' rights to information ahead of voting are sacrosanct, requiring the disclosure of party political funding and other matters.
Sarupen stated that, in principle, political parties are supposed to play open cards with potential voters on who they are fielding in different municipalities. This, he said, will help voters decide who to vote for in advance and not after. The DA believes that the parties in question are taking advantage of a law meant to kick in situations that could not be foreseen, and that this approach is a perversion of the very meaning of a candidate election.
The law in question was intended to cover situations where parties make entirely unexpected and fortuitous surges in support and end up winning a few more PR seats than their lists could cover before the election. However, Sarupen argued that the parties are using this law to hide or conceal their candidates from voters and wait for the election to be done before submitting names to the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC).
Sarupen cited the EFF as an example, stating that the party has submitted a full list of its ward councillor candidates in all municipalities but chose to only submit one name for PR. A similar case was made for ActionSA, which allegedly submitted more than 2,000 ward councillor candidates in all municipalities but also opted to send one PR name even in the Johannesburg council, where it currently holds 44 seats, most of which are PR councillors.
ActionSA has publicly acknowledged that its approach was deliberate, submitting one name so that it could supplement its list after discovering how many seats it had won. The party even stated that it would use the seats it attains as rewards for party members who work hard during the election campaign, putting the party ahead of residents and voters. The DA now wants the Electoral Court to decide whether deliberately omitting a full list of councillor candidates can be used as an electoral strategy.
The DA's case is that this approach cannot be done, as it would be hiding candidates from voters. This is particularly important after the African National Congress (ANC) was excluded from contesting in various municipalities after failing to submit its lists on time. If the ANC had engaged in the same wilful deception of voters and only submitted one name on the list, it would be on the ballot.
Key points
- The DA has challenged the EFF, MK Party, ActionSA, and Good over their decision to submit only one PR candidate in some municipalities.
- The parties in question are taking advantage of legislation that allows them to supplement their lists after the elections if they win more seats.
- The DA argues that this approach is an attempt to dupe voters by not disclosing a full list of candidates.
