Suliman Rajah writes*:
I write not to celebrate the recent inspection operation conducted by the JB Marks Local Municipality, but to correct the deeply misleading narrative presented in your article of August 14.
Your report frames the municipality’s enforcement action as a victory against non-compliance, repeatedly singling out “foreign nationals” and informal traders as the central problems facing Potchefstroom. This portrayal is not only inaccurate – it is a deliberate deflection from the true crisis plaguing our municipality.
The Real Story Your Article Missed
While your newspaper highlighted the detention of foreign nationals and the absence of Certificates of Acceptability, you failed to ask the most important question: Why are these certificates and documentation not in place?
The answer lies not with the traders, but with a municipality that has systematically failed to create accessible, affordable pathways to compliance. Instead of facilitating local economic development as required by Section 152 of the Constitution, the JB Marks Municipality has prioritised enriching connected tenderpreneurs – many of whom are not even qualified for the contracts they receive.
Not a single trader among those inspected has contributed, in percentage terms, even a fraction of the financial damage caused by tender corruption and municipal mismanagement. Yet your article gives the impression that these small business operators are the primary drivers of municipal dysfunction. This is scapegoating, plain and simple.
A Tale of Two Standards
Your readers deserve to know the full picture. When White Monopoly Capital interests require regulatory facilitation, the municipality ensures paperwork is in place “without much fuss.” But when poor Black South Africans and foreign nationals attempt to participate in the informal economy, the full weight of enforcement – including police presence, media engagement, and multi-departmental teams—is unleashed.
This double standard is not merely unjust – it is unconstitutional. Section 9 guarantees equality before the law. Selective enforcement based on race, nationality, or economic status undermines this fundamental right.
Constitutional Obligations Ignored
Nowhere in your article did you contextualise the constitutional requirement to redress the imbalances of the past. The legacy of apartheid spatial planning and economic exclusion means that informal trading is not a criminal enterprise – it is a survival strategy and a legitimate form of economic participation that municipalities are obliged to support and regulate fairly.
Instead of meeting this obligation, the JB Marks Municipality has chosen to blame its own failures on the most vulnerable members of our community.
Accountability Begins at the Top
If the municipality were serious about compliance, it would start with a transparent audit of its own procurement processes. It would publish the qualifications of every tender recipient. It would explain why funds meant for service delivery have vanished into the pockets of connected individuals.
Instead, we are treated to a performance of enforcement against informal traders while the real looters operate with impunity.
A Call to the Community and to The Herald
I call upon the residents of Potchefstroom to see this operation for what it is: a desperate attempt to justify failure by blaming the poor. I also call upon The Herald to exercise its journalistic duty by interrogating the municipality’s financial management and procurement practices with the same vigour it applies to inspecting informal traders.
The people of this city deserve better than scapegoating. They deserve accountability, transparency, and a municipality that serves all – not just the connected few.
Yours in solidarity and truth,
Suliman Rajah
*The views and opinions expressed in this letter are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Potchefstroom Herald or Mooivaal Media. The Potchefstroom Herald reserves the right to edit letters for length, clarity and language.
