MK Party slams Umzinyathi municipality for asking jobseekers about political affiliation
The uMkhonto Wesizwe Party (MKP) has criticised the Umzinyathi District Municipality for allegedly breaching constitutional and labour laws by including a question about political party affiliation in its official job application forms.
MKP Inkosi Bhambatha Regional Detachment spokesperson, Innocent Shabangu, described the practice as unlawful and discriminatory.
'This is a blatant breach of the Constitution and employment legislation,' said Shabangu.
He said the question violated:
Section 9(3) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on political grounds,
Section 6(1) of the Employment Equity Act, and
Section 67(1)(a) of the Municipal Systems Act, which requires fair and merit-based appointments.
Shabangu warned that such practices could entrench political patronage and discourage capable individuals from applying for municipal jobs.
The MKP has called for:
The immediate removal of the question from application forms,
A full investigation into recent appointments, and
Action to ensure hiring processes remain impartial.
The Umzinyathi District Municipality did not respond to requests for comment by the time of publication.
The municipality, which has been under provincial intervention since 2016, reported more than R1.7 billion in irregular, unauthorised and fruitless expenditure during the last financial year.
Newly elected Mayor T Mchunu recently announced the adoption of a funded budget – a first in years – in a bid to stabilise the institution.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Like our Facebook page, follow us on Twitter and Instagram or email us at [email protected]. Add us on WhatsApp 071 277 1394.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
36 minutes ago
- IOL News
The absence of SA's ambassador not to blame for US 30% tariff hike, says Lamola
Minister Ronald Lamola says South Africa's absence of an ambassador in Washington is not the reason for the 30% US import tariffs. Image: AFP International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola said he does not believe South Africa's current lack of an ambassador in Washington has affected the country's ability to negotiate an agreement following the United States' decision to impose steep 30% tariffs on imports. Speaking at a joint media briefing on Monday at the Germiston Civic Centre in Ekurhuleni, alongside Trade, Industry and Competition Minister Parks Tau, Lamola addressed the diplomatic fallout after former South African ambassador to the US Ebrahim Rasool was expelled in March. 'We had an ambassador in the US and that ambassador was expelled,' said Lamola. 'President (Cyril) Ramaphosa has always prioritised the US in terms of ambassadorial responsibility.' Lamola said the expulsion has complicated the process of appointing a new ambassador. 'The fact that our ambassador was expelled means that the new process to appoint the ambassador will not be as easy as it would have been when an ambassador had not been expelled,' he said. 'We have to take all careful consideration, all due diligence, and I can confirm that that process is at an advanced stage. The President, at the right time, will announce who will become the ambassador of South Africa to the US.' Lamola said that the appointment would be made solely by the president, in accordance with the Constitution. 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 ✕ The 30% tariffs, introduced by the administration of US President Donald Trump, are set to take effect at 12:01 a.m. on August 8. While other African countries, such as Lesotho and Zimbabw,e will face a 15% tariff, South Africa has been singled out for a significantly steeper duty. Lamola, however, dismissed suggestions that the absence of an ambassador had weakened South Africa's negotiating position. 'Ambassadors do not negotiate any trade deals,' he said. 'The trade deal is being negotiated under the leadership of the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC), with coordination and support from the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO).' Lamola confirmed that South Africa currently has a chargé d'affaires (a diplomat) in Washington who engages with key stakeholders but does not lead negotiations. 'There are countries that do have ambassadors in Washington. They don't have a trade deal. So, the trade deal is negotiated by the relevant line function department. In this instance, it is the DTIC, which we are supporting, including our chargé d'affaires in the US, who does from time to time point to the relevant people,' he said. He further rejected claims that the absence of an ambassador directly caused South Africa's failure to secure a tariff exemption. 'If that were the case, all countries with ambassadors in Washington wouldn't be having the same challenges we're facing,' said Lamola. 'This is a global phenomenon, not a South African problem.' Rasool, who previously served as ambassador to the US from 2010 to 2015 during the Barack Obama administration, was reappointed in January 2025 under the Joe Biden and later Trump administrations. Rasool was dismissed in March after the remarks he made during a webinar hosted by the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection (Mistra), under the theme 'Implications of Changes in US Administrations for SA and Africa'. During the event, Rasool urged South Africans to familiarise themselves with the country's national interest framework, calling it a critical guide amid shifting global dynamics.
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
MK Party sends legal letter to Ramaphosa over two acting police ministers
Manyane Manyane | Published 1 hour ago The uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) says South African taxpayers cannot afford to pay for two ministers in one portfolio as it accused President Cyril Ramaphosa of of violating his oath of office and failing to uphold the Constitution as required by that office. This was after Ramaphosa placed Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on leave and appointed Professor Firoz Cachalia as acting Police Minister. MKP leader, Jacob Zuma, has also given Ramaphosa until 10am on Friday, August 8, to resign. In a letter dated August 4, Zuma said he will take action against Ramaphosa if he fails to adhere to the demand. Ramaphosa's spokesperson Vincent Mangwenya said they were aware of the letter. 'The legal team will deal with that letter,' he said. The letter from KMNS attorneys, who act on behalf of Zuma, comes after the Constitutional Court last week dismissed the MKP's application to have a direct access to challenge Ramaphosa's decision to place Mchunu on a leave of absence, appointing Cachalia as acting police minister and establishing a judicial commission of inquiry to investigate the corruption allegations in the police and judiciary. 'Various reasons have been offered in respect of the decisions which were impugned by our client and uMkhonto weSizwe Party in the Constitutional Court which found that it lacked exclusive jurisdiction and/or has no basis to grant the requested direct access. "As a result, our client has or sought urgent advice on possibly taking the relevant dispute(s) to the High Court and/or any other appropriate forum. It is assumed that you stand by the reasons previously given for the decisions announced on 13 July 2025,' reads the letter. The party's spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela added: ' The judges did not want to take a decision knowing exactly that the MK Party has a strong case. By placing Mchunu on leave of absence and appointing Cachalia as an acting police minister, the country is having two ministers of police. Both ministers are acting.' Zuma, who said he is a concerned citizen, a voter and a former President, also demanded the date and time when Ramaphosa decided to place Mchunu on leave of absence and the decision to appoint Cachalia as acting police minister, as well as their current positions. 'When exactly (date and time) was your decision to place Minister Mchunu on leave of absence taken? When exactly (date and time ) was your decision to appoint Professor Cachalia as Acting Minister of Police (was) taken, communicated to him and to the public? 'What exactly is a 'Minister Designate', from a constitutional point of view? Immediately after the swearing-in ceremony (i.e. from around 9:30am on 1 August 2025), what was the exact correct description of Professor Cachalia? Was he a minister, acting minister or minister designate? What is the present, correct, full and official description of Mr. Senzo Mchunu? If the answers are the same, for how long is it envisaged that South Africa will have and pay for two Ministers of Police at the same time?' Zuma asks in the letter. He also wanted to know Ramaphosa's reasons for not dismissing Mchunu based on the allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal police boss Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, that Mchunu had ties to criminal gangs and meddled in police investigations into politically motivated murders. Zuma also wanted to know what is the public benefit in having two ministers of police, adding that one is active, while the other one is on leave. 'What were the reasons why one of the 2 (two) Deputy Ministers of Police was not promoted to the position of Acting/Minister of Police as you did, for example, with Deputy Minister (Buti) Manamela who was subsequently promoted to Minister of Higher Education? What are the estimated costs to the taxpayers for the failure to act in a similar or consistent manner?' He said irrespective of the answers Ramaphosa might give, his conduct to place Mchunu on leave and appoint Cachalia remain illegal, irrational and unconstitutional. 'With the publicly available information as well as the pleadings and deliberations in the recent Constitutional Court proceedings, our client is of the view that, irrespective of any answers you might give to the above list of questions, the impugned conduct remains illegal and irrational and unconstitutional.' 'It may have been further compounded by the events which occurred between July 13 2025 and August 1, 2025 and which have a continuing adverse impact on the South African citizens and taxpayers, including our client,' the letter read, adding that Ramaphosa should withdraw his decision to place Mchunu on leave and the appointment of Cachalia. 'Due to the obvious urgency and importance of the issues raised above, these demands must be fulfilled immediately but by no later than 10h00 on Friday, August 8 2025, failing which all our client's rights are reserved, including the right to urgently approach the courts for appropriate relief, without any further notice to you.' [email protected]
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
MK Party condemns ConCourt's dismissal of court challenge against Ramaphosa
Thabo Makwakwa | Published 1 hour ago The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party has voiced its strong condemnation of the Constitutional Court's recent decision to dismiss a critical challenge against President Cyril Ramaphosa's actions, asserting that the judiciary has failed to hold the head of state accountable for what the party describes as 'flagrant constitutional violations.' Party spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela issued a statement on Monday criticising the court's move. 'To the shock of most South Africans who believed that the rule of law still prevails, the Constitutional Court has unfortunately chosen to turn a blind eye and take the easy way out by hiding behind technicalities, instead of addressing the real issues that the MK Party has presented.' He added that the court's decision to defer the matter to the High Court effectively sidesteps what the MK Party sees as a looming constitutional crisis. The challenge was rooted in President Ramaphosa's decision to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave and to announce Professor Firoz Cachalia as the acting Police Minister, a move the MK Party argues contravenes constitutional provisions and undermines accountability. 'The Constitutional Court has abdicated its responsibility to hold the Executive accountable,' the statement continued. 'This decision disregards the courageous efforts of whistleblowers like General Mkhwanazi and many others who are committed to fostering a safer, more accountable South Africa.' The MK Party is not backing down and announced that it is exploring all peaceful avenues to press for justice. As part of its next steps, the party stated it issued a formal letter of demand to President Ramaphosa, requesting him to explain the ongoing constitutional turmoil. The party stated that among the questions posed are issues surrounding the funding of two Police Ministers and an allegedly 'illegal Commission of Inquiry', which the party says are politically motivated and fiscally irresponsible. 'We have also demanded that President Ramaphosa respond to a list of 15 questions by August 8, 2025, concerning his dealings with the CR17 and Phala Phala scandals, which continue to cast a shadow over his presidency,' Ndhlela explained. 'This crisis is unfolding at the expense of South Africans who deserve honest leadership and transparency.' In addition, the MK Party said it plans to write to the Chief Justice, urging the judiciary to furnish the reasons behind its recent ruling adding that once all pertinent information is obtained, the party promises to outline its next steps and inform the public accordingly. Furthermore, Ndhlela said the MK party remains unwavering in its stance that President Ramaphosa's resignation is in the country's best interest. 'Any political party or member of Parliament who votes against our forthcoming Motion of No Confidence should be prepared to face the justified anger of South Africans,' Ndhlela warned. The MK Party said it continues to organise peaceful demonstrations in support of whistleblowers and advocates for Ramaphosa's removal from office. [email protected] IOL Politics
