The DA is moving to fast-track its legal challenge over the future of the JB Marks Local Municipality, as no party has come forward to oppose its case in the Pretoria High Court.

The matter centres on the DA’s application to have JB Marks disestablished and split back into the former Tlokwe (Potchefstroom) and Ventersdorp local municipalities, following what the party describes as years of declining service delivery since the controversial 2015 merger.

DA caucus leader in JB Marks, Hans-Jurie Moolman, confirmed this week that despite ample opportunity, no opposing papers have been filed.

“Any party had the right to oppose. To date, nobody has filed any opposition,” Moolman said on Tuesday, April 21, adding that the deadline to do so is expected to expire by the end of the week.

Instead of opposing the application, the Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB) has submitted the official record of its decision, a standard part of the legal review process. This record is intended to place the court in the same position as the original decision-maker, enabling it to determine whether the MDB’s refusal to disestablish the municipality is reviewable and can be set aside.

Moolman said the DA has since filed a supplementary affidavit in response to the record. “The purpose is to put the court in the same position as the demarcation board when the matter is decided,” he explained.

He believes the latest developments have strengthened the DA’s case. The legal battle follows the MDB’s decision on August 7, 2025, to reject calls to reverse the merger and retain the status quo, despite mounting pressure from political parties and residents.

More than 14 000 people had signed a petition in support of demerging the municipality. The DA argues that the original merger, implemented in 2015 at the request of then Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Pravin Gordhan, was politically motivated and carried out without proper assessment of its impact on service delivery or administrative feasibility.

“This political interference is further evidenced by the MDB’s refusal to conduct meaningful public participation before the merger and its disregard for recommendations contained in its own research,” Moolman said.

According to the DA, the MDB’s own findings at the time warned that merging the municipalities could lead to service delivery disruptions and instead proposed alternative ways to support Ventersdorp without dissolving the existing structures. Residents in both Potchefstroom and Ventersdorp have since felt the effects, the party claims, pointing to ongoing issues with basic services.

In 2023, after the MDB called for public submissions, the DA and other stakeholders formally requested the board to reconsider its earlier decision. While initial engagements suggested the board was open to reviewing the matter, the process was ultimately delayed and later dismissed.

“This refusal is deeply troubling, especially given the severe decline in service delivery since the merger, a decline the MDB itself predicted,” Moolman said.

The DA further claims that documents obtained after the decision show the MDB’s new research supported disestablishment and provided little justification for keeping the municipality intact. Despite this, the board rejected the request, prompting the DA to turn to the courts.

“The MDB must be held accountable for providing flimsy and irrational reasons for its decision and for allowing political expediency to override the best interests of residents,” Moolman said.

With no opposition filed and the review process now underway, the DA is expected to push for an urgent court date to have the matter heard, as it continues its bid to reverse the merger and restore separate municipalities for Potchefstroom and Ventersdorp.