EFF's challenge to fuel levy hike dismissed
Image: Ian Landsberg
The Western Cape High Court has dismissed the EFF's urgent application to interdict the 4% fuel levy increase, which takes effect on Wednesday.
The EFF had filed the urgent court case, challenging Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's decision to increase the General Fuel Levy. The levy increased by 16c per litre on petrol and 15c per litre on diesel.
The EFF through Advocate Mfesane Ka-Siboto had argued that the increase would unfairly burden the working class and poor, worsening inequality and violating constitutional rights.
He said the minister's decision lacked both rationality and parliamentary oversight.
Ka-Siboto further told the court, in accordance with the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act, only a law could serve as the proper instrument for the minister to impose a tax.
The EFF claimed that Godongwana overstepped his powers by announcing the fuel levy increase in his Budget speech, without parliamentary approval.
"What is clear is that the minister is imposing tax," Ka-Siboto said, citing the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act as the legal framework Godongwana should have followed.
The EFF also argued that the fuel levy increase is both economically unjust and unconstitutional.
"It deepens inequality and undermines access to essential goods and services. We are committed to fighting the fuel levy increase in court and in parliament," the party said.
However, Advocate Kameel Premhid, representing the national Treasury, argued that the fuel levy increase is not a tax but rather a regulation charge.
Premhid maintained that the minister has always had the power to adjust fuel levies as part of the budgetary process.
"Regulatory charges bring in money, so they might raise revenue. But that doesn't make it a tax, and just because a tax also raises revenue, the two are not the same thing."
The Western Cape High Court's dismissal of the EFF's bid means the fuel levy increase will go ahead as planned.
The EFF may still pursue its challenge to the fuel levy increase in Part B of its application, which seeks to review and set aside Godongwana's decision.
Meanwhile the Department of Minerals and Energy has confirmed that fuel prices will decrease from today, despite the hike in the General Fuel Levy.
Providing reasons for the fuel adjustments, the department said the average Brent Crude oil price decreased from 66.40 US Dollars (USD) to 63.95 USD under the period under review while the Rand appreciated on average, against the US Dollar (from 18.84 to 18.11 Rand per USD) .
Based on current local and international factors, the fuel prices have been adjusted as follows:
- Petrol 93 and 95 (ULP & LRP) is down by 5c per litre
- Diesel (0.05% sulphur and 0.005% sulphur) has dropped by 36c per litre
- Illuminating Paraffin (wholesale) is down by 56c per litre
| Additional Reporting Staff Reporter
Cape Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
9 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The National Dialogue is going nowhere fast, and that's a great pity
The National Dialogue is dead, long live a national dialogue, or something to that effect… where or how to start such a dialogue, the lower-case one, is the next big task. We know that we have to talk, but we can't seem to agree on what to talk about, or whom to include in such talks. It's all rather bewildering. As mentioned previously, opposition to President Cyril Ramaphosa's initiative is, 'in one sense, a good thing', because it meant that people were engaging with the proposal, and that 'a measure of distrust of the government is always necessary'. In among it all lies the way forward, or rather 'a way forward'. For what it's worth, I remain convinced that the Diagnostic Overview of the National Development Plan is a good place to start, with the necessary updates, inclusions and adaptations. Opposition to Ramaphosa's National Dialogue has moved between positions of outright contempt, to self-dramatisation, bad faith and inauthenticity. Then again, it really was a stretch to imagine the Democratic Alliance, MK party and the EFF supporting anything put forward by Ramaphosa; they were, as they usually are, 'a little too precise, a little too rapid' in their response to the National Dialogue. My colleague Stephen Grootes used the term performative, which is a useful way of describing their responses. These political groups are, at least, consistent and have always presented themselves as indispensable for South Africa's future. Taking them at their word, they are the indispensables. The latest withdrawals will probably mean that the National Dialogue, in its current conception, will not start. The latest group of refuseniks who were meant to participate in preparations toward the National Dialogue have accused the president's initiative of rushing, of 'cutting corners' and of 'centralising power'. The latter is difficult to fathom because it seems to me that opening up a discussion on the country's future is actually about decentralising influence and power and about bringing together political and civil society. Never mind. Leading the most recent resistance, and what may well torpedo the president's initiative, are the Thabo Mbeki Foundation and the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation, the Steve Biko Foundation, the Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation, the FW de Klerk Foundation, the Oliver and Adelaide Tambo Foundation, and the Strategic Dialogue Group. At first glance, the new resistance projects an image of loyal criticism in the sense that they believe, for sure, that something ought to be done, and that they would like to be part of that something if the necessary changes and improvements are made. Closer scrutiny suggests that there may be a loss of the spirit of compromise with which Mbeki and the late former president FW de Klerk (and Ramaphosa, in particular) were familiar. It's all rather confusing. It's a bit like trying to figure out how something or someone can be all over the place at the same time. We have to wait and see what emerges. What I want to discuss is the idea of compromise, and of bringing the opposition into the room. The Mbeki-De Klerk non-compromise A long time ago, during the latter stages of the Codesa negotiations, I had a chat with former president De Klerk about compromise in politics and about its gains and losses. Regardless of what I (many of us) thought at the time, De Klerk believed he had made the greatest compromises, first, with his 'own people' about ending legal apartheid, and then with the ANC in the final months of the negotiations process. The conversation ended on a sobering note. 'You don't have to tell me about making compromises,' De Klerk said. And so I was surprised that the foundations of former presidents Mbeki and De Klerk were among the refuseniks. They would at least understand that Ramaphosa's initiative was somewhat of an acknowledgement that the ANC-led state had lost the power and will to steer South Africa, and that it sought to forge stronger alliances with civil society. All the more surprising was that the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation withdrew. They would represent civil society with a little less political baggage than the Mbeki and De Klerk foundations. Then again, the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation probably endorsed the (political) compromises that created the current Government of National Unity. The objective of that compromise, it seemed to me, was by and large to maintain the political and economic status quo that took shape after 1994. To the extent, then, that the envisaged National Dialogue included the main parties that gave us concepts like ' sufficient consensus ' in the early 1990s, one may be forgiven for believing that the Mbeki and De Klerk foundations would, at least, enter into preliminary discussions on the National Dialogue. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas Let's try to think harder about negotiations, bargaining and more honest discussions among political and social society. Bringing together political society and social society — all interested parties — into a room to discuss a way forward does not always guarantee optimal outcomes. As the tired idiom has it: turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Let's try a more sophisticated example, grounded in reality (turkeys don't actually vote, nè). Imagine a village, somewhere in Central America, that is plagued by crime, gender-based violence and drug abuse. A leader of the village suggests a 'dialogue' about crime, gender-based violence and drug abuse, and invites everyone into a hall to discuss what is wrong and what ought to be done about it. One suggestion is that the local municipality installs high-mast lighting as a way to curb criminal activities at night. Now, among the invited, for the sake of democracy, representation and inclusivity, are criminals who have an interest in darkness. Criminals thrive on operating in the dark. The initiative to install high-mass lighting fails because there is no consensus. The criminal elements on the guest list of civil society vote against high-mast lighting. It is at this point that the local leaders can simply go ahead and authorise installation of the high-mass lighting by some decree or authoritarianism, or on the basis of 'sufficient consensus', or by asking the criminals to vote against their interests. What will it be? What should it be? I just don't know. I return to the befuddlement of a political superposition — trying to figure out how something or someone can be all over the place at the same time. Nobody knows what will happen next. I don't know what will happen next. But because I don't know what will happen next, does not mean everyone else does not know what will happen next. Maybe somebody does know what will happen next. I think I mangled a line from the film The Milagro Beanfield War, but it works, kinda. For now, we remain in stasis — what has become South Africa's original position. DM
IOL News
20 hours ago
- IOL News
Joy at last for first successful land restitution claimants
Elandskloof CPA committee members outside the Western Cape High Court. Image: Supplied AFTER more than two decades, the Elandskloof community, South Africa's first successful land restitution claim involving over 300 families, is set to regain full control of their land. The Western Cape High Court on Thursday lifted the administration order placed on their Community Property Association (CPA) in 2005. 'The administration order granted by this court on 18 October 2005 under the hand of her Ladyship Ms Justice Ndita in terms of the provisions of section 13(1) of Communal Property Associations Act 28 of 1996 be rescinded with immediate effect,' the court ruled. In 1996, Elandskloof, a rural village in the Cederberg made history as the first successful land restitution case in a newly democratic South Africa. It also became home to the country's first CPA, established and registered under the newly enacted Communal Property Association Act of 1996. The history of the Elandskloof community dates back to the early 1800s. In 1962, as a result of apartheid forced removals, families who had lived on the land for generations were displaced and resettled in various parts of what was then the Cape Province. 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 ✕ Although the resettlement process began in 1998, it soon stalled due to financial constraints. In the years that followed, the shortcomings of the restitution process became increasingly evident: land was returned without the capital or support needed to develop it, and many beneficiaries disconnected from rural livelihoods after decades of displacement continued to carry the deep scars of apartheid. The process was marked by ongoing tensions and conflict within the community. The Department of Land Reform and Rural Development eventually applied to the Western Cape High Court to place the Elandskloof CPA under administration, steps the government deemed necessary to address persistent mistrust, internal conflict, non-compliance, and a lack of skills and capacity within the CPA. The department then this year approached the court to have the administration rescinded, to relieve the government of its administrative role and return full control of the CPA's affairs to its duly elected committee, allowing the community to govern itself. Some of the steps taken by the department during the administration period included a local committee being established consisting of the members of the community occupying the land to assist the officials with the management of the day to day issues of the residents. Basic services such as the provision of electricity, water and refuse collection were restored by the local municipality. A mediator was appointed to mediate the dispute between the members of the CPA. 'The annual general meetings (AGM) of the (CPA's) members were restored with attendance of the majority of the members of the community. The committee of the respondent was duly elected by its own community members to resume an independent management of its own affairs for the benefits of Its members and by themselves,' the department's court application for the rescission read. 'The committee is positive and dedicated and fully capable of executing its tasks and responsibilities. The environment in the community has less mistrust, tension and conflict and is conducive for the respondent to regain full ownership of its processes, roles and function. The (CPA) is confident that they are ready to take full ownership of its processes, whilst it may be (with) continued support from the department and other institutions on an ad hoc basis.' Beneficiary Ansie Visagie travelled from Worcester to be at the high court on Thursday. 'We feel very excited about the milestone we've reached today. It's a big moment, especially after what happened in 1996 and the setback that followed in 2005. Many beneficiaries have since passed away, which makes this moment even more special. "My vision for Elandskloof is that it should be a developed farm where people can function independently, where individuals can do something for themselves and truly operate independently. The most important thing that must happen is that people must get proper housing. Especially for the elderly, they deserve the joy of having a real house they can call their own.' Committee chairperson, JP George added: 'I spoke with a lump in my throat when I spoke to the committee. Words cannot describe it, we fought something like 34 years to get Elandskloof back and we were under administration for 20 years. We are grateful, now we can regroup and build Elandskloof into what we know it can be. It's a milestone in our history. It shows if we work together and believe in each other, we can reach success.'
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
City monitors shutdown threat amid tariff backlash
Authorities are tracking the origins of a viral shutdown message, but local councillors say residents are tired of large-scale protests. A WhatsApp message urging an illegal shutdown of Ekurhuleni on Monday and Tuesday has caught the attention of authorities. However, whether South Africans would muster the courage to act on civil disobedience incitement remains a question mark. Viral message calls for mass action The message, the origin of which is untraceable, has circulated across thousands of residents' chat groups and reads as an emotional plea to Joe Public to take action. 'From 18-20 August, we are calling for a complete shutdown. All entrances must be closed. No work. No school. No business as usual. We have tried talking. We've sent people to negotiate. But they lie at the Gauteng legislature, saying our issues are resolved. That's a lie. Nothing has been resolved,' read the message. City of Ekurhuleni spokesperson Zweli Dlamini said they were aware of the message and authorities have been notified. 'This kind of incitement for what ultimately leads to civil disobedience is not conducive to constructive discourse,' he said. 'Intelligence agencies are investigating the source of the message and balance of probabilities that it will take place.' ALSO READ: Protestors allegedly set Germiston Home Affairs building on fire [VIDEO] Doubts over protest turnout Local councillor Simon Lapping does not think the protest will materialise. 'Everyone has the right to protest. But in the past few years, the last major protest I saw was when Jacob Zuma was jailed, which erupted in [KwaZulu-Natal],' he said. 'Since then, the only coordinated action of note in Johannesburg was about a year ago when the EFF marched to the [Johannesburg Stock Exchange], and that ended as a damp squib. People are tired of protest.' The last time Ekurhuleni saw a major protest was in May, when traffic officers illegally blockaded major highways in and out of the city. Anger over municipal tariffs The latest message went on to attack municipal rates. 'We don't want suspended tariffs we want them cancelled. We want every unjust municipal debt scrapped. They treat Ekurhuleni like a cash cow, bleeding us dry with high rates, taxes and unfair electricity charges.' This is likely in response to stepped up collection efforts by the city's finance department over the past six months, a programme that has yielded substantial success. The message also suggested that 'other communities buy electricity from Eskom at better prices and still get proper service delivery but not us. We buy directly from the municipality and still get nothing in return. No development. No fairness. No dignity. 'It's time we fight for what is rightfully ours. To the tenants know this: the homeowners you rent from are suffering under this system. They carry the full burden of these inflated bills. If they don't pay, their electricity gets cut off. And you suffer, too.' 'Fragmented' activism Lapping said the call to action will end up the same way as the EFF's failed JSE march. 'Nationalism here has become fragmented and divisive. If you look at the usual protest suspects, they cannot seem to organise themselves into any real mass action because they simply do not have the numbers,' he said. 'What we are seeing instead are sporadic outbursts of frustration and anger, like in Tembisa when people protested over the electricity flat fee hike, or in Germiston where housing issues sparked unrest.' Potential middle-class backlash A local security expert said it will only be a matter of time before the middle class will rise up from their couches and object, either via protest or boycotts. He said more affluent people usually need to take a lot of sucker punches before they would strike back. NOW READ: Nearly 400 suspended EMPD officers facing the axe over illegal strike action
