Read more
Joburg council given 10 days to appoint acting city manager amid calls for salary reimbursement
Opposition calls for reimbursement of salary and benefits of Floyd Brink.
Councillors in the City of Joburg council chambers in Braamfontein on 30 September 2022. Picture: Neil McCartney / The Citizen
The City of Johannesburg will now have to find an acting city manager after Floyd Brink’s appointment was declared unconstitutional.
The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg delivered its ruling on Tuesday.
Appointment unlawful
In the judgment, acting High Court Judge Steven Budlender found that the metropolitan municipality’s decision to cancel the advertising of the city manager’s position was unlawful.
Budlender also found that the city council’s decision to authorise then Joburg mayor Thapelo Amad to apply “corrective measures pertaining to the recruitment process of the city manager as a matter of urgency” was unlawful.
The judge ruled that the approval of the mayor’s decision to offer Brink a five-year fixed-term employment contract was invalid.
ALSO READ: Will City of Joburg collapse?
“Decision taken, and acts performed, by Mr Brink in his capacity will not be invalid by reason only of the declarations of invalidity,” the judgments reads.
The City of Joburg has been ordered to allow the council to appoint an acting city manager within 10 working days.
The respondents, which are the municipality, the council, the office of the city manager and mayor Kabelo Gwamanda, and speaker Colleen Makhubele, were also ordered to pay the costs, including the costs of two counsels, of the court application brought by the Democratic Alliance (DA).
Brink assumed his role as city manager after receiving the greenlight in a council meeting on 23 February this year.
He previously served as the city’s COO for four years before acting in the city manager position from February 2021.
The DA challenged Brink’s appointment in May on the basis that he did not meet the minimum requirements of the job specifications, which mandated 10 years’ senior management experience.
The city, however, defended Brink, saying he held several senior positions in Limpopo.
‘Blatantly flouted processes’
DA Johannesburg caucus leader, Belinda Kayser-Echeozonjoku, has since welcomed the high court ruling.
“This judgment strengthens our resolve to ensure that the Johannesburg council is dissolved so that fresh elections can take place, giving the voters themselves the opportunity to resolve the crisis of governance in the city,” she said in a statement.
Kayser-Echeozonjoku said the party believed the ruling was confirmation that Gwamanda and Makhubele had “blatantly flouted processes to ensure Brink’s deployment”.
“Johannesburg’s rot has now been laid bare, and it is a disgrace that a high court judgment was necessary for the law to be followed.”
READ MORE: ‘Fix-me-upper’?! R2bn, 10 years to refurbish Metro Centre ‘ridiculous
She added that the city manager position was “often coveted by those who make themselves guilty of corruption and tender fraud as it is a key role”.
Meanwhile, political party Xiluva has called for Brink’s salary and benefits he received to be reimbursed to the city and to be declared as fruitless expenditure.
The party also highlighted Brink was placed on special leave in April 2022 over alleged misconduct committed during his time as acting city manager.
It was alleged that Brink flouted procurement processes in acquiring equipment worth R320 million, but the charges against him were dismissed in a council meeting in September.
City studying judgment
The metropolitan municipality has indicated that it was studying the judgement and “will in due course advise on the city’s reaction to its contents”.
“This will be done in consultation with the speaker of council as the head of council which is the appointing authority in relation to the position of city manager,” the city’s statement reads.
“We wish to reiterate our commitment to acting in the best interests of the residents of the city and its administration at all times. We shall not be deterred nor distracted even in this instance.”
“In our attempts to insulate administrative responsibility from political bigotry and in line with our priority of good governance and stabilising the City of Johannesburg, we continue to expect and view these litigious actions with a dim view,” Gwamanda said.
