The Electoral Court of South Africa recently delivered favorable rulings for the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) in three out of four cases concerning candidate lists for the 2026 local government elections. The court heard the cases on September 15, 2026, and delivered its orders in three cases on the same day, with the fourth case being decided the following morning. Written judgments were released eight days later. The cases involved disputes over the submission of candidate lists, with some parties claiming that technical issues prevented them from completing the submission process.
One of the cases was an intra-party dispute in which the IEC was cited as an interested party. The commission promptly substituted the candidates as soon as the court order was granted. The court's ability to assemble panels of judges with experience in electoral law was also noteworthy, as it added weight to the enforcement of electoral laws. Three of the cases concerned the same issue - the failure to submit candidate lists on time - and the court's consistent rulings reinforced the importance of adhering to electoral deadlines.
The principle at stake in these cases was the "rigid adherence" to electoral laws, as set by the Constitutional Court. The IEC's Online Candidate Nomination System (OCNS) required parties to submit their candidate lists by 5 pm on August 28, 2026. However, some parties, including the ANC, failed to complete the submission process, citing technical issues. The commission demonstrated that the OCNS functioned optimally, and the ANC's contention that "glitches" prevented them from submitting their lists was rejected.
The court's judgment highlighted several key points, including that any act required by law must be performed by 5 pm on the specified date, and that electoral deadlines are aimed at achieving fairness, certainty, and orderly administration of elections. The court also emphasized that neither the court nor the commission has the power to condone non-compliance with electoral laws. The judgment reinforced the foundation for the rigid application of electoral law, which is essential for ensuring fairness and certainty in the electoral process.
The ANC had argued that uploading the nomination documents was sufficient compliance, and that clicking "submit as final" was not necessary. However, the court found that the ANC's case was actually about the significance of the "submit as final" function, which is a factual enquiry rather than a matter of law. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the IEC, finding that the party's exclusion from the elections was by operation of law, meaning that it was automatic and did not require a discretionary decision.
The concept of "operation of law" was central to the court's decision. In this context, it means that certain consequences follow automatically when a specific set of facts exists. For example, if a party fails to submit its candidate lists on time, it is automatically excluded from participating in the elections. This approach provides certainty, predictability, and fairness, and avoids the need for litigation.
The court's decision has significant implications for the electoral process in South Africa. It reinforces the importance of adhering to electoral deadlines and the rules governing candidate nominations. The IEC's use of the OCNS and the requirement to click "submit as final" were deemed essential for ensuring the integrity and fairness of the electoral process. The ruling also highlights the limits of the court's power to hear appeals, which is restricted to decisions relating to the interpretation of the law.
Key points
- The Electoral Court's rulings in favor of the IEC reinforce the importance of adhering to electoral deadlines and the rules governing candidate nominations.
- The court's decision highlights the concept of "operation of law," which provides certainty, predictability, and fairness in the electoral process.
- The ruling has significant implications for the electoral process in South Africa, reinforcing the importance of integrity and fairness in candidate nominations.
