The Gauteng High Court has reserved judgment in an urgent application challenging the suspension of the Tshwane Metro manager Johann Mettler, with a ruling expected on July 31.

The application was brought on an urgent basis to have Mettler’s suspension set aside.

According to the information presented in court, the applicants argued that irreparable harm would result if what they described as Mettler’s unlawful suspension is not overturned immediately.

It was alleged in court that the Speaker, Mncedi Ndzwanana, unlawfully manipulated the council vote on Mettler’s suspension.

The applicants said they believed they had presented a strong case and would await the court’s judgment.

DA Tshwane caucus leader Cilliers Brink said the party’s case is that ‘irreparable harm would follow if Mettler’s unlawful suspension is not set aside at this time’.

Brink added that the DA contends their allegations that the Speaker unlawfully manipulated the council vote on Mettler’s suspension.

“Counsel for the Speaker did not put up any significant defence to our contention that the vote rigging was unlawful.”

According to Brink, the party is confident in the strength of its case.

“We think that we have advanced a very strong case and we will await the outcome of the court judgment, which is expected on Friday morning,” he said.

During court proceedings, Solidarity argued that the decision to suspend Mettler was allegedly unlawful on several grounds.

The trade union submitted that the council’s decision was flawed because the votes of certain councillors on his suspension were excluded unlawfully.

According to Solidarity, no law or municipal provision empowers the Speaker to deprive councillors of their voting rights in the manner alleged.

The trade union argued that voting rights in a municipal council may only be limited where legislation expressly permits it.

Anton van der Bijl, head of Solidarity’s legal department, said the organisation’s legal team argued that the council had also failed to comply with the legal requirements for a precautionary suspension.

According to Van der Bijl, the applicable regulations require a council to have concrete reasons why the continued presence of a senior manager could influence an investigation, the municipality, individuals or property.

He alleged that in Mettler’s case, no factual grounds had been provided and that only the wording of the regulations had been repeated.

Van der Bijl said Solidarity argued that such an approach deprived an employee of the opportunity to make meaningful representations before a suspension was imposed.

He said the legal team also argued that the decision was inconsistent with the principle of legality and did not meet the requirements governing the exercise of public power.

According to him, Solidarity’s position is that the decision was neither rational nor lawful and should therefore be set aside.

The trade union asked the court to reinstate Mettler pending the outcome of the final review proceedings.

According to Van der Bijl, any later judgment would have little value if the disciplinary process had already been completed, while irreparable damage had already been caused to Mettler’s reputation and the municipality’s administration.

“We are firstly satisfied that his case was fully presented before the court. We now await the judgment and believe the court will ensure justice is done and confirm the principles of proper public administration,” he said.

Separately, the Freedom Front Plus (FF+) announced that it had lodged a complaint with the PP against the Speaker.

The party said the complaint was intended to ensure accountability after allegations that the Speaker had once again undermined democratic processes in the metro.

According to the FF+, the complaint follows the urgent High Court application concerning Mettler’s suspension. The party said it supports the legal proceedings but believes a parallel investigation by the PP is necessary to examine the purportedly possible political interference and the conduct of individual councillors.

The complaint is directed at both Ndzwanana and the councillors who supported the decision against Mettler. The party said it wants every councillor involved in the decision to be held personally accountable.

The FF+ also said it intends to invoke Section 32 of the Municipal Finance Management Act to seek recovery of any financial losses or legal costs from the personal assets of the councillors it holds responsible.

The party further referred to a 2023 High Court ruling, which found that Ndzwanana had acted irrationally and beyond his powers when he repeatedly rejected motions of no confidence.

According to the FF+, the court at the time found that his conduct compromised the impartiality of his office and undermined the council’s institutional integrity.

The current court application stems from a special council meeting held on July 9.

According to the court papers referred to by the FF+, the council initially voted 95 to 92 against suspending Mettler.

The party alleged that after the result was announced, the Speaker retrospectively excluded the votes of 13 opposition councillors, thereby changing the outcome.

The FF+ said neither municipal legislation nor the council’s standing rules gives a Speaker the authority to revise a completed vote in that manner. The party said that if the court confirms these allegations, they will point to a concerning pattern.

It added that it would continue to monitor the matter to ensure that democratic processes and the rule of law are upheld.

Do you have more information about the story?

Please send us an email to bennittb@rekord.co.za or phone us on 083 625 4114.

For free breaking and community news, visit Rekord’s websites: Rekord East

For more news and interesting articles, like Rekord on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or Instagram or TikTok or WhatsApp Channel