PLEASE READ THIS AND PLEASE SPREAD THIS KNOWLEDGE

Every voter in South Africa should keep Sections 152 and 153 of the Constitution, (Chapter 7: Local Government), constantly in mind.

Why?

These two sections outline the core objects and DEVELOPMENTAL duties of municipalities. They are particularly important during the local government elections. They are also to be borne in mind when national or provincial outcomes influence coalition governments or cadre deployment at local level. These constitutional provisions set the constitutional benchmark for what local government must deliver.

Voters therefore hold the power to enforce development outcomes and accountability through their ballots.

Section 152 outlines the objects of Local Government as follows:

A municipality must strive, within its financial and administrative capacity, to achieve the (following) five objects:

(a) Provide democratic and accountable government for local communities.

(b) Ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner.

(c) Promote social and economic development.

(d) Promote a safe and healthy environment.

(e) Encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in local government matters.

Section 153 outlines the Developmental Duties of Municipalities as follows:

A municipality must:

(a) Structure and manage its administration, budgeting, and planning processes to give priority to the basic needs of the community and promote its social and economic development.

(b) Participate in national and provincial development programmes.

These are not optional aspirations or political promises, they are binding constitutional obligations.

Municipalities exist to deliver basic services (water, sanitation, electricity, refuse removal, roads, etc.) in a sustainable manner. This provision of the constitution prioritises the poor, urges development, and requires responsiveness and accountability to residents, not to party bosses or elites.

Why should voters keep these 2 provisions of the Constitution constantly in mind before voting?

South Africa’s many dysfunctional municipalities reflected in failing infrastructure, service delivery protests, financial distress, rampant corruption, and collapse, as seen in places like parts of the Eastern Cape, Free State, and Limpopo, directly violate these 2 sections.

These municipalities are breaking the supreme law of our nation.

Voters must use these two provisions to ask: “Have those who were elected 5 years ago delivered on sustainable services, basic needs, development, safety, and community involvement, or have they failed?”

Do you still want them to be in charge of your municipality?

We are so fortunate in our country to have a constitution that gives us so much power.

For us, elections are the primary mechanism for democratic accountability. Under s152(a), councillors and mayors are elected (or appointed via party lists) to fulfil these duties.

Poor performance, cadre deployment that ignores competence, tender corruption that continues for ever, or neglect of basic needs in spite of protests, should influence our vote.

As with lobola, let us secure written undertakings for delivery of what we need, before we give away our votes.

If we bind politicians to deliver what we need, according to our list, we can hold them accountable.

Good governance in metros and local councils must reflect in cleaner audits and better service delivery in historically marginalised and underserved areas.

If that is not so, these municipalities are not adhering to the principles outlined in sections 152 and 153 of the constitution.

The councillors for these failures should be not be getting another chance to mess up even more.

Everyone has experienced how local government failures hit our daily life the hardest. Pipes bursting, refuse piling up, electricity tariffs rising steeply, power outages happening frequently, taps drying up, roads disintegrating, development evaporating and unemployment sky rocketing.

Section 153 of our constitution explicitly demands that municipalities should prioritise basic needs in planning and budgeting. (IDP)

Voters who ignore this risk, will help top perpetuate these cycles of dysfunction.

Experience will have taught us to seal commitments with political parties in writing, before the elections.

Signing an antenuptial contract after the wedding or waiting for lobola after the bride has left home is to lose out.

If we do not have our list of urgent development requirements rubber stamped and signed before the elections, political parties will engage in horse trading after the elections to get prime positions for themselves and forget their responsibilities to voters.]

Our needs must be their priorities.

Many political parties treat local government as a patronage vehicle rather than a developmental sphere.

Voters must look at who the candidates are, study their CVs, and ask themselves whether the candidates are capable of promoting large scale development. Without development, the economy of towns and cities will shrivel.

Many towns are already ghost towns.

In December 2025, I visited Dannhauser and Glencoe in KwaZulu-Natal. Cows were walking on the main road, chickens were scratching at the side of the road. Beautiful buildings were shuttered. It looked like a ghost town.

The councils in these towns were not adhering to the constitutional demand for robust development. There was no development to speak about.

It seemed to me that they were ignoring the Constitution.

By becoming informed voters, we can demand to see the detailed plans of parties for proposed development before the elections. This is the time when we can call the shots. Through our solidarity we can demand large scale development, better service delivery, clean administration, and continuous community engagement.

The Constitution in s152(e) demands community involvement.

It requires us to participate in creating our municipality’s 5-yr master plan, the IDP. Let us help create the IDP with our DNA in it. Let such an IDP determine the budget. Let us use the elections as our leverage.

Local government, according to our Constitution, is not a jobs programme for politicians or a site for political squabbling or score-settling as has been regularly happening.

Local government is a constitutional mechanism for delivering services, development, and accountability where people live.

Before marking any ballot, we must measure the plan that parties are putting before you.

If they come without any plan, that should ring the alarm bells. They have none. They are taking chances.We must reject generic manifestos. They mean nothing.

Furthermore, we must study the profile of candidates, particularly those on the PR list. We must also analyse past records and check what the Auditor General’s report said.

Finally, we must vote against this standard set by the Constitution so that we vote for concrete outcomes, not endless theatre.

We can do that by checking whether political parties have plans:

1. for large scale infrastructure development to support the supply of basic needs and job creation,

2. that are likely to support delivery of sustainable and affordable services,

3. for safety and for healthy living,

4. real community input?

Up to now, most politicians have treated the municipality as a personal or party fiefdom.

Our Constitution is clear. Persistent failure at local level isn’t just “bad management,” it’s often a breach of these foundational constitutional duties.

Voters who internalise ss 152 and 153 will be better equipped to demand better governance rather than accepting excuses, rhetoric, failures and increased costs.