The truth about fighting e-tolls

On 3 December the e-toll system in Gauteng will be launched officially.

As this reality dawns, everyone from civil society to the big guns such as Justice Project South Africa (JPSA), the Democratic Alliance (DA) and Confederation of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) are drawing their swords.

In light of this, advice on how to undermine the system is doing the rounds on social media platforms.

The allegedly ‘above board’ way to avoid paying e-tolls is the following:

First of all motorists must not buy an e-tag. Then they must send a registered letter to the South African Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) saying they want to pay but need a detailed invoice. The motorists must demand that the invoice be sent by registered mail.

Following this they must have their letter stamped by a commissioner of oaths and keep the registered mail receipt. When the registered mail notification comes they must take as long as possible to collect it.

After doing this the motorist must demand via a second registered letter that Sanral supply them photographic proof that it is indeed their vehicle that passed the particular gantries. Again the motorist must demand the evidence be sent by registered mail.

And so this elaborate cat-and-mouse game is supposed to crash the e-tolling system.

However, one of the most vocal in the fight against e-tolling has advised motorists strongly against this.

On 27 November the Record spoke to Howard Dembovsky, the National Chairman of JPSA, who counts Zwelinzima Vavi of Cosatu and Tokyo Sexwale as his comrades in arms in the fight against e-tolls, to establish the way forward post 3 December.

“My immediate reaction is to be very, very careful of these kinds of emails and nonsense that are posted on social media platforms. I believe that e-tolls can be dispensed of properly with the courts,” says the fiery Dembovsky.

“I am saying, refuse to pay e-tolls. People must have the moral courage to stand in front of a court and tell them why they refuse to pay e-tolls. They will be acquitted,” Dembovsky said self-assuredly. He repeated his answer to the Record when asked if he was sure people would be acquitted.

“Something that needs to be taken into account is the constitutionality of the system. It is an outright lie to say that it has been tested in the Constitutional Court. What has been before the Constitutional Court was the case of the judge ordering the interdict. They are using this to mislead the people,” explains Dembovsky.

“My colleagues and I are not joking when we say we shall not pay e-tolls. They can prosecute me if they want,” says the defiant Dembovsky.

“The problem with that ‘advice’ going around is that there is no part of e-toll legislation that says notifications or invoices has to be sent by registered mail, unlike with Aarto. So the whole thing will backfire on motorists who try and follow that.

“Even if Sanral gets 70 per cent compliance, which is doubtful since they are standing only on 28 per cent, it will fall flat because the cost of collection is unmanageable and uneconomical. So what they are doing to counter that should make people angry and make them refuse to buy into the system. Suppose a person who registers for a pre-paid e-tag will pay approximately 30c per kilometre. If one only registers one’s number plate and not get an e-tag you will pay 58c per kilometre. If a one does neither, you will pay R1,74 per kilometre. To me this is financial blackmail and this is what should get people up in arms. The fuel levy is more than sufficient,” concludes Dembovsky.

He says there is no law forcing a person to buy an e-tag and reiterated that people should have the ‘moral courage’ to face prosecution since the system is unconstitutional.