Makate vs Vodacom: Court silence sparks outrage over delayed Please Call Me ruling
Image: Siphelele Dludla / independent Newspapers
The #PleaseCallMe Movement (PMC) has written an open letter urging national leaders to step in and resolve the ongoing legal dispute concerning the "Please Call Me" service, as it remains unresolved nearly six months after the Constitutional Court heard the case.
The organisation has described the delays as 'unfair' and warned that they threaten the integrity of the country's justice system.
The dispute began in 2000 when Nkosana Makate, then an employee at Vodacom, proposed a service allowing users to notify contacts they were calling without incurring charges.
This simple innovation would generate billions of rand for the telecom giant.
Makate's efforts to secure fair compensation have spanned over two decades and have resulted in multiple court victories.
His legal journey has resulted in nine judgments in his favour, including three from South Africa's highest court, the Constitutional Court.
In 2016, the Constitutional Court criticised Vodacom and its executives for unethical conduct, emphasising the importance of recognising Makate's contribution.
Despite these rulings, a final resolution has remained elusive.
In 2019, the Supreme Court of Appeal ordered Vodacom to pay Makate between 5% and 7.5% of the revenue generated by the service over the past 18 years.
Vodacom appealed, and the case was escalated to the Constitutional Court, which has yet to rule.
The court recently announced that its decision is 'reserved,' and no timeline for judgment was provided.
The Open Letter: A Call for Justice and Accountability
On Thursday, Modise Setoaba, Convener of the #PleaseCallMe Movement, issued an open letter expressing frustration and concern over the judicial delays.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
The letter underscores how the protracted process damages public trust and undermines the social contract.
'This is unfair. The #PleaseCallMe case illustrates how financial influence can be used to hinder, direct, disregard, and undermine the country's laws.
'It is generally recognised that the issue has been extensively ventilated and Makate has consistently come out on top, with nine favourable decisions — yet the principle of res judicata does not seem to be invoked.'
The letter also criticises the lack of leadership and the growing impatience among supporters.
'We are sitting on the sidelines watching as time goes by. While it seems difficult to reach the end, my worry is the social contract. How are we encouraged to obey the law when publicly observing it being abused like this for so long?'
Makate's supporters further voiced their frustrations, emphasising that they have maintained peaceful protests.
'We have made it clear from the beginning that our enemy is Vodacom and its arrogant CEO. We worked hard and kept all demonstrations peaceful, raising our frustrations at their premises, the JSE and the Constitutional Court. No incidents of property damage were reported.'
In a candid reflection, the letter asked whether violence would have changed anything.
'Maybe we should have been violent, damaged property, burned tires, blocked streets, looted shops—those are the languages the corporate bourgeoisie understands.
'But what would that have done for Makate? He is the litigant here. The focus should be on him and the progress he has made alone. We are not a rent-a-crowd.'
'While Makate is subdued in the legal process, we must ask: Where are the leaders of society—political or otherwise? Why is this man ignored? Are we afraid of losing deals or jobs? Who's next?'
'To put it into perspective, my child was not yet conceived when PCM was introduced; now she's a doctor. That's how long this matter has been dragging on.'
Legal experts and civil society groups have voiced alarm at the delays. An article published last week by IOL highlighted the nation's growing frustration.
Dunisani Mathiba, from the Office of the Chief Justice, explained that delays are often due to the complexity of cases and the deliberation process.
'There is no set timeframe within which judgments are typically issued. The judges will determine when the judgment is ready.'
Legal analyst Francois Botes pointed to systemic issues hindering timely justice.
'The workload is overwhelming, and vacancies on the bench worsen things. Short-term measures like appointing acting judges help, but are insufficient. Long-term reforms are necessary to address these systemic challenges.'
The #PleaseCallMe Movement's open letter concluded with a plea for decisive leadership.
'We call on the leaders of this country—political, judicial, and societal—to recognise the importance of this case, not just for Makate but for the integrity of our justice system.
'Justice delayed is justice denied. The longer we wait, the more trust we erode in our institutions. It is time to act and ensure fairness prevails,' read the letter.
thabo.makwakwa@inl.co.za
IOL Politics
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The watchdogs of democracy – the vital role of SA's state institutions
The brilliance of South Africa's Constitution lies not in its articulation of values – dignity, equality and freedom – but in its creation of mechanisms to guard them, the Chapter Nine institutions. In the global sweep of constitutional democracies, South Africa stands apart. Not only because of our painful past or our extraordinary democratic transition, but because of the bold institutional imagination embedded in the very structure of our Constitution. Few understand this better than distinguished former Constitutional Court Justice Albie Sachs, who not only helped shape our legal framework but also carries lived experience of how fragile democracy can be and how dependent it is on the strength of its institutions. In his reflections, Sachs draws attention to an essential, but often underappreciated truth, namely that without independent, resilient and properly empowered state institutions, the lofty ideals of constitutional democracy remain little more than words on a page. Sachs' own journey sharpened his insights: after surviving a car bomb in exile that cost him an arm and an eye, he emerged not bitter, but determined, driven by one question – how could South Africa build a constitution strong enough to resist the abuse of power, yet open enough to protect dignity, freedom and justice for all? His search for constitutional models led him to Europe, where he found that in monarchies, constitutions played a minor daily role, while in republics like France and the US, they became essential tools to channel new, people-centred sovereignty. What Sachs took from this was not a romantic fascination with documents, but a practical appreciation for the 'technology' of democracy: the institutions that give a constitution life. The birth of Chapter Nine The brilliance of South Africa's Constitution, Sachs argues, lies not in its articulation of values – dignity, equality and freedom – but in its creation of mechanisms to guard them. Enter Chapter Nine institutions, or as Sachs calls them, the 'watchdogs of democracy'. Unlike many countries, South Africa did not stop at defining the three classic arms of state: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The drafters went further, carving out an entire constitutional chapter for a set of independent bodies whose role is to protect democracy itself. These include the Public Protector, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), the Human Rights Commission, the Commission for Gender Equality, the Auditor-General and several others. Why are these bodies critical? Because they serve as circuit breakers when traditional political channels fail. They are there to ensure that the abuse of power, misuse of funds or erosion of human rights does not go unchecked, even when those in power might prefer silence. The power of the Public Protector The Public Protector's journey, as Sachs recounts, is a telling example. Once seen as a non-binding investigator, it evolved into a powerful accountability tool after constitutional refinements and key Constitutional Court rulings made its recommendations binding. But here, Sachs offers a cautionary insight: institutions matter, but so do the people who lead them. Under Thuli Madonsela, the Public Protector became a symbol of fearless oversight, standing up to the highest offices in the land. Yet under other leaders, the same institution, with the same legal powers, has sometimes faltered, becoming mired in litigation and political controversy. This is not a defect of the constitutional design, but a reminder that constitutional democracy depends not only on rules but on integrity, leadership and public vigilance. The IEC and the culture of credible elections Another institution Sachs highlights is the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), where South Africa, guided by Indian experts, learnt to navigate the complex task of running inclusive, credible elections. Sachs recounts how, even in the turbulent first elections of 1994, where irregularities were acknowledged, the major parties chose to prioritise the democratic breakthrough over narrow electoral disputes. That spirit, combined with the IEC's institutional strength, helped lay the tracks for the democratic train to move forward. Judicial independence and the Judicial Service Commission Perhaps the most critical piece of the institutional puzzle is the judiciary. Sachs recalls the fierce debates in Kempton Park where negotiators grappled with how to appoint judges in a way that balanced independence with public legitimacy. The compromise was a Judicial Service Commission (JSC) made up of legal professionals, political representatives, and presidential appointees. It ensured that the judiciary would not become an isolated elite, appointing itself without accountability, but neither would it be captured by the ruling party. This design gave South Africa one of the most powerful Constitutional Courts in the world, with the authority to strike down laws, hold Parliament and the executive to account, and even, famously, to declare aspects of the Constitution itself unconstitutional when they failed to meet the negotiated principles. The unsung hero If there is one institution Sachs singles out as an unsung hero, it is the Auditor-General (AG). Next to the courts, Sachs suggests, no body has done more to safeguard South Africa's democratic health. Why? Without rigorous oversight of public finances, democracy withers. The AG's work ensures that taxpayers' money is properly accounted for, that secret funds are subject to control, and that corruption can be exposed. Remarkably, South Africa has had a strong track record here, with successive AGs maintaining independence and credibility. The limits It would be naïve to suggest that state institutions alone can solve South Africa's challenges. Sachs is the first to acknowledge that the country remains deeply unequal, unsafe and haunted by social injustice. But crucially, he argues, we are also an open society – one with noisy, vibrant and contested democratic spaces. And much of that openness is safeguarded by the institutional architecture envisioned in Chapter Nine. These bodies are not flawless. They rely on leadership, public awareness and political will. But they offer a structural safeguard against the concentration and abuse of power, and they embody a key insight: democracy is not a once-off achievement; it is a living, breathing practice that must be nurtured, protected and constantly renewed. Hats off to the drafters As Sachs puts it, hats off to the drafters of our Constitution. In a world where many democracies are backsliding, South Africa's institutional framework remains a remarkable experiment in how to design for resilience. Yes, institutions can falter, and leaders can fail, but the genius of the constitutional arrangement is that it anticipates human fallibility and provides mechanisms to correct course. In the end, as Sachs reminds us, it is not just about watching; it is about creating. These institutions are not passive observers; they actively shape the democratic landscape, holding power to account and keeping the promises of our Constitution alive. That is the true role of state institutions in supporting constitutional democracy: they are the quiet architects of freedom, the steady hands that hold the democracy project together, even when the political winds blow hard. As South Africans, it is our job not just to defend them, but to demand they live up to their mandate. After all, as Sachs's own life has shown, the good that can come out of bad depends on what we choose to build and the institutions we choose to uphold. DM This article draws on the Inclusive Society Institute's Constitutional Insights: A Series of Talks with Judge Albie Sachs. The series is being promoted in collaboration with the Daily Maverick. Nicola Bergsteedt is a research associate of the Inclusive Society Institute. The Inclusive Society Institute is an independent non-profit institution which has as its objective the promotion of a more inclusive, just and equitable South African society.
IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
Free 1996 Constitution booklet signed by South African greats now valued at nearly R1 million
A free 1996 booklet titled "The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa", bearing the signatures of South African greats, is now valued at nearly R1 million. Image: File "I know him, I know him and I also know her." These were the words uttered by former President Nelson Mandela when he was asked to autograph a 1996 booklet, "The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa", lovingly gathered over a few years by retired chef Neels du Plooy. Now the much-travelled booklet is on sale on Facebook Marketplace with a price tag of a million rand, which might seem steep were it not for the fact that it has the signatures of 30 iconic South African political leaders and judicial pioneers who crafted our peaceful transition to democracy. Many South Africans got a copy of the beloved booklet when it was released, but while ours have no collector value, Du Plooy's is sure to pique the interest of collectors of Mandela memorabilia and those fascinated in our transition to democracy. It has the signatures of former presidents, Nelson Mandela and Mbeki, as well as the last apartheid president, FW de Klerk and current head of state, Cyril Ramaphosa. It also bears the signature of the King of Lesotho and the first Speaker of Parliament, Frene Ginwala, Albie Sachs, Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court in 1999 and a host of others. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Chef Neels du Plooy with then-President Thabo Mbeki at a game farm in 1999, where he got a signature from Mbeki and his wife, Zanele. Image: Supplied "Mandela was the only one who autographed the booklet who was interested to see who else had signed it, saying 'I know him, I know him and I know her'", Du Plooy told "Independent Media Lifestyle". Du Plooy, 71, was given a copy of the booklet by a journalist friend, and he wasted no time as a chef with Fedics to gather as many signatures as he could of the influential personalities whenever the opportunity arose. "I cooked 99 percent of them, so I always carried the booklet with me and would ask the head chef if I could ask them for autographs. "I even cooked for former President Thabo Mbeki and his wife on a game farm at Mapungubwe in 1999, where we spent four days just before Christmas, and that is when I got both their signatures," he said. He was involved in the catering for the inauguration of Mbeki. Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki at the latter's inauguration as president of South Africa in 1999, both of whom signed Neels du Plooy's booklet on our Constitution. Image: Debbie Yazbek "In the late '90s, I was at the opening of the Lesotho Highlands Katse Dam and took the booklet with me, and after the meal, there were a lot of MPs, including Ramaphosa and five or six premiers of the first administration whose signatures I was able to get." That's where he also got the signature of King Letsi III, ruler of the Kingdom of Lesotho. Du Plooy managed to get the signatures of George Bizos, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Kader Asmal, Arthur Chaskalson and Govan Mbeki. Du Plooy, who lives in Sandringham, Johannesburg, was later a chef at a restaurant in the Joburg Civic Centre in Braamfontein, and so he used that opportunity to gather signatures of important people when they came to dine. He believes it is the only booklet in the world that bears the signatures of four state presidents. But there is one signature at the top left of the first page of the booklet which he has not been able to identify. "I only got signatures of significant people at the time, so it was someone important, I am just unable to work out whose signature it is," he said. The signature at the top left of this page has turned out to be a puzzler for Neels du Plooy, who only sought the signatures of significant players in our transition to democracy. Image: Supplied Du Plooy said there is one signature he wishes it had, and that is of Roelf Meyer, who was a key drafter of the Constitution, with whom he has lost contact. The Marketplace advert states that the booklet is accompanied by a provenance certificate and official ISBN registration. "This volume is a verified original - an irreplaceable piece of South African history... Ideal for collectors of Mandela-era memorabilia, constitutional scholars or institutions preserving democratic heritage."
The Citizen
13 hours ago
- The Citizen
Here's when the Madlanga commission investigating Mkhwanazi's claims will start
The public hearings will be held in Pretoria. Former Constitutional Court (ConCourt) judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga's judicial commission of inquiry into the police is set to begin its proceedings next month. The public hearings are scheduled to take place in Pretoria. The inquiry has been tasked to investigate allegations of criminality, corruption, and political interference within South Africa's criminal justice system. Its scope extends to major state institutions, including the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the South African Police Service (Saps), and the State Security Agency (SSA). ALSO READ: Parties question ANC MP's election in Mkhwanazi ad hoc committee, logistics concerns raised The commission has the authority to summon individuals for testimony, among other functions, as outlined in the terms of reference published in the Government Gazette last month. A preliminary report is expected within three months, followed by a final report in six months, although the timeframe could be extended if necessary. President Cyril Ramaphosa previously stated that the inquiry should not take longer than a year. Madlanga commission's first sitting confirmed In a statement released on Wednesday, the commission confirmed that hearings will officially commence on 1 September. After considering several venues across Gauteng, the Bridgette Mabandla Justice College in central Pretoria has been chosen as the venue for the hearings. 'The venue is available to the commission free of charge,' the statement reads. READ MORE: Ramaphosa says punitive action against Mchunu would set dangerous precedent According to the commission, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is handling logistical arrangements to ensure the hearings start on time. 'Likewise, the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure is attending to alterations that will make the venue fit for purpose. 'It is important for the public to note that the commission's offices are not yet available for submissions and further announcements will be made in this regard.' [DOWNLOAD]: Judicial Commission of Inquiry into criminality, political interference and corruption in the Criminal Justice System arising from the specific allegations made public by Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi on 6 July 2025. 🔗 — The Presidency 🇿🇦 (@PresidencyZA) July 23, 2025 Ad hoc committee The commission was established after KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's explosive allegations. Among these were claims that Police Minister Senzo Mchunu – currently on special leave – intervened to disband the political killings task team in order to shield individuals linked to politically connected crime syndicates. Mkhwanazi further alleged Mchunu had connections to tenderpreneur Vusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala, a figure who previously held a now-cancelled R360 million police contract. A parliamentary ad hoc committee has also been set up to investigate Mkhwanazi's claims, operating separately from the judicial commission. This committee, which has until 31 October to complete its work, adopted draft terms of reference this week to guide MPs in carrying out the inquiry. Hearings are scheduled to start in Johannesburg and will continue in Cape Town following Parliament's recess. NOW READ: Here are some of the rules outlining Parliament's Mkhwanazi allegations probe
