IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
CASE NO. 40/08
In the matter between:
MOUTSE DEMARCATION FORUM AND 15 Applicants OTHERS
And
PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH Respondents AFRICA AND 17 OTHERS
ANSWERING AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF THE SEVENTH, EIGHTH AND NINTH RESPONDENTS
I, the undersigned,
PHUTI CHRISTOPHER RAMMUTLA
do hereby make oath and state that: 2
1. I am the Chief State Law Advisor in the Office of the Premier, Limpopo
Province.
2. I have been authorized to oppose this application and to depose to this
affidavit on behalf of the seventh, eighth and ninth respondents.
3. The facts that I describe in this affidavit fall within my personal knowledge,
unless the context indicates otherwise, and are, to the best of my knowledge
and belief, true and correct.
4. As set out in the answering affidavit deposed to on behalf of the second
respondent, the applicants rely on two alternative causes of action in this
application:
4.1. They challenge the Constitution Twelfth Amendment Act of 2005
(“the Amendment Act”) and the Cross-Boundary Municipalities
Laws Repeal and Related Matters Act 23 of 2005 (“the Cross-
Boundary Act”) which effects the transfer of Moutse 1 and 3 to
Limpopo province on the basis that it is irrational and therefore
inconsistent with the Constitution (“the rationality argument”).
4.2. They contend that the province of Mpumalanga failed to follow the
prescribed procedure set out in section 118(1)(a) of the Constitution 3
by failing to facilitate public involvement in considering and
approving the part of the Amendment Act that related to Moutse 1, 2
and 3 (“the public participation argument”).
5. In this affidavit I do not address the public participation argument as this has
been dealt with exhaustively in the affidavit filed on behalf of the sixth
respondent in this matter.
6. Furthermore, in an effort to avoid prolixity, I do not intend to repeat any of
the allegations or submissions made on behalf of the second respondent in
relation to the rationality argument. I do however associate myself with those
allegations and submissions and ask that they be read as if specifically
incorporated herein.
7. In this affidavit I respond to the allegations set out in the founding affidavit
relating to service delivery in the Moutse 1 and 3 areas. These allegations
relate to the provision of water, health, education, social development
services, police, transport, recreation facilities and roads.
The pace of service delivery
8. The point of departure in a discussion about service delivery is an
appreciation of the challenges facing municipalities in predominantly rural 4
areas. Lamentably, these challenges and backlogs in service delivery are not
unique to municipalities in Limpopo province but are part of the national
landscape.
9. Despite the enormous challenges facing the Elias Motsoaledi local
municipality and the Marble Hall district municipality, it is noteworthy that
there has been an overall improvement in delivery in most sectors.
10. This is confirmed in a recent report on service delivery compiled by the Elias
Motsoaledi Local Municipality. This report is attached marked “PCR1”.
11. I also refer to an extract from the Municipal Demarcation Board’s
Assessment of Capacity for the 2008/2009 Period for Nkangala District
Municipality (annexed marked “PCR2”). The similar report for Sekhukhune
District Municipality contains information dated 2001, so for purposes of
comparison I refer to the figures contained in “BNN9” at pages 71 and 72.
To avoid prolixity, I do not attach that annexure to this affidavit.
12. A comparison of the figures for core service delivery reveals, for example,
that with regard to water, in Elias Motsoaledi Municipality the backlog was
approximately 21% of households, whereas in the adjacent Dr JS Moroka
Municipality which falls within the province of Mpumalanga (and to which
the applicants seek to be transferred) the backlog was approximately 29%. 5
13. The report, “PCR1”, also describes the challenges experienced in service
delivery since the transfer to Limpopo Province, and steps that have been
taken to deal with them.
13.1. At the time of the transfer of the relevant areas to Limpopo
Province, a Premier’s Emergency Infrastructure Grant (“PEIG”) was
allocated to the former cross-boundary areas to assist in
infrastructure development. A list of the projects initiated as a result
of the PEIG is annexed as “PCR3”.
14. I now deal with service delivery in the specific areas identified by the
applicants in their founding papers.
Water
15. In relation to the provision of water services I refer to the supporting
affidavit of Brian Ezekiel Mphosho Masenya, annexed hereto marked
“PCR4”
16. The relevant legislative regime entrenches the primary responsibility for the
provision of water services as that of local government rather than provincial
government. 6
16.1. The Interim Constitution of 1993 allocated to local government the
task of making provision for access to water and sanitation, subject
to the condition that “such services and amenities can be rendered in
a sustainable manner and are financially and physically practicable.”
16.2. Schedule 4 Part B of the 1996 Constitution (“the Constitution”)
tasks local government with providing “water and sanitation
services, limited to potable water supply systems and domestic
wastewater and sewage disposal systems”.
16.3. In terms of the Water Services Act 36 of 1998, national government,
through the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (“DWAF”) is
responsible for sector policy, support and for regulation. DWAF
operates water resource infrastructure and some bulk water supply.
16.4. Water Service Authorities (WSA’s), being metropolitan
municipalities, some district municipalities and authorized local
municipalities, are in terms of the Water Services Act, responsible
for ensuring access of consumers to water services.
17. The WSA in charge of providing water services to the Moutse 1 and 3 areas
is the Greater Sekhukhune District Municipality. 7
17.1. Soon after the transfer of the former cross-boundary areas to
Limpopo Province, water was identified as a service delivery
priority. The following challenges were acknowledged:
17.1.1. Although there was reticulation infrastructure in some parts
of Moutse, there was no water supply for this
infrastructure.
17.1.2. The delivery of water in tanks was not consistent, and the
amount delivered was not sufficient.
17.1.3. Where wards or villages had boreholes, these were often
not working.
17.2. As a result, it was decided to focus firstly on repairing existing
boreholes and improving bulk water supply (tankers). In addition,
existing reticulation systems would be resuscitated, and finally,
reticulation would be installed in as many villages as possible.
17.3. These projects were dealt with under the PEIG. 8
17.4. I annex hereto annexure “PCR 5”, a report on interventions in
Moutse by the Limpopo Department of Local Government and
Housing. According to this report R41.163 million was spent by
July 2008 on projects in water, sanitation and electricity.
Specifically, 6634 households had benefited from the water projects.
17.5. The list of PEIG projects from the 2006/2007 Financial Year
(annexed as “PCR3” hereto) lists in detail the projects and amounts
spent on them.
17.6. The biggest intervention made in relation to water is the
establishment of a water treatment works by the Sekhukhune
District Municipality.
Health
18. In relation to health services, the supporting affidavit of Ntombizandile
Mabindisa, annexed hereto marked “PCR6” shows that the people of Moutse
have access to comprehensive health services provided by the Philadelphia
Hospital which is a regional hospital. They also have access to a district
hospital, Groblersdal Hospital. This is in addition to services provided by
community clinics. 9
19. The only services not provided by this hospital are tertiary health services.
Philadelphia Hospital has however entered into collaborative agreements
with tertiary hospitals (most notably George Mukhari Hospital in Garankuwa
and Steve Biko Academic Hospital in Pretoria) in terms of which patients
who require services not provided at Philadelphia Hospital can be transferred
or referred to these hospitals, space permitting.
20. The Limpopo provincial government have made a number of interventions in
relation to Health in Moutse:
20.1. As at 31 July 2008:
20.1.1. R15 500 000-00 was spent on staff accommodation,
palisade fencing, upgrading of ward ablution and replacing
of the standby generator at Philadelphia Hospital;
20.1.2. A laundry upgrade of R9 660 093-00 was made at
Philadelphia Hospital;
20.1.3. A project involving the construction of a new emergency
medical centre costing R5 116 000-00 is currently
underway; 10
20.1.4. In the year 2011/12, plans are underway for the upgrade of
Outpatient Department, casualty and the gateway clinic.
The budget for this project is R19 000 000-00.
20.2. In relation to the Groblersdal Hospital, projects by Limpopo
province include:
20.2.1. the recent completion of staff accommodation and palisade
fencing which cost R10 848 127-00; and
20.2.2. a project which is still in the tender stage for a new forensic
pathology facility which will cost R8 800 000-00.
Education
21. In relation to Education, the Limpopo Department of Education has
implemented the National School Nutrition Programme. From April to June
2008 almost R2 million was spent on 103 schools in the area. 11
22. Other initiatives introduced include the further training of educators. Topics
dealt with include:
22.1. Moderation on continuous assessment;
22.2. Subject advisors training;
22.3. Training for educators in technology; information communication
technology; mathematics and science;
22.4. Early childhood development. This entailed further training of
Grade R practitioners. Thus far at least 40 of 140 educators have
received further training in early childhood development. Plans are
underway to ensure that all Grade R educators in the area receive
further training.
23. In addition foreign educators were deployed who specialize in mathematics,
physical science or chemistry.
24. As dealt with in supporting affidavit of Zwoitwaho Nevhutalu (annexure
“PCR7” hereto), the Limpopo Department of Education is in the process of 12
establishing a State of the Art Circuit Structure in Moutse which will entail a
conglomeration of the four circuits.
25. This is a groundbreaking intervention aimed at capacitating schools,
educators and learners in the area.
Sport and Recreation
26. Sport and recreation are alive and well in Moutse. There are a number of
football clubs which are active in Moutse at the moment.
Roads and Transport
27. The supporting affidavit of Sepena Mojapelo (attached as “PCR8”) sets out
the two major projects undertaken at the moment, namely maintenance of
existing roads and the upgrade of the road between Moutse and Marble Hall
from gravel to tar.
28. AD PARAGRAPHS 11 TO 28
28.1. For the reasons set out above, I deny that the first applicant
represents the community of Moutse. 13
28.2. Furthermore I point out that:
28.2.1. all the applicants have addresses which are situated in
Moutse 3.
28.2.2. Frieda Rakwena and Kinny Mmakola allege in their
affidavits (WMR30 and WMR38) that they reside in
Walkraal, in Moutse 2. I deny that Walkraal is in Moutse 2.
Walkraal is in the north-western extremity of Moutse 3.
29. AD PARAGRAPH 29
29.1. I deny that the first applicant acts in the interests of the community
of Moutse or in the public interest.
30. AD PARAGRAPH 30
30.1. I point out that the group of people affected by the transfer of
Moutse from Mpumalanga to Limpopo is wider than merely those
people in the Moutse areas. 14
30.2. I refer, as an example, to annexure WMR9 to the founding affidavit,
specifically at page 110, which demonstrates that a number of
villages within the then Northern Province were in need of services
located in or near the Moutse areas.
30.3. I refer also to item (i) in part 2 of schedule 1 to the Interim
Constitution (Act 200 of 1993), which does not single out Moutse
on its own as an affected area, but the entire area originally
proclaimed to be part of KwaNdebele. While this refers primarily to
areas now part of Mpumalanga, it shows that Moutse must be
considered in the context of surrounding communities and
developmental progress.
30.4. I deny that the first applicant has the standing to act in the interests
of all the people affected by the transfer of Moutse 1 and 3 to
Limpopo or in the public interest.
31. AD PARAGRAPH 44
31.1. It is denied that Elias Local Motsoaledi Municipality administers
Moutse 2. Moutse 2 falls within the jurisdiction of Dr JS Moroka
Local Municipality in Mpumalanga. 15
32. AD PARAGRAPH 50
32.1. I point out that “Moutse” refers to a constellation of areas which are
not geographically homogenous or contiguous.
32.2. Save as is consistent with what is contained above, I deny the
allegations contained herein.
33. AD PRAGRAPHS 51 TO 53
33.1. I deny that the town of Siyabuswa is the only geographical
separation between the different parts of Moutse.
33.2. I refer to what is set out in the affidavit filed on the second
respondent’s behalf regarding the geographical position of Moutse.
34. AD PARAGRAPHS 54 AND 54.1
34.1. It is not clear which road is referred to. I will assume it is the R537,
which is the most direct route from Pretoria to Marble Hall. 16
34.2. Most of the inhabitants of the entire region (whether they live in
Limpopo or Mpumalanga) are either employed in Gauteng or
engaged in other forms of business activity in Gauteng.
35. AD PARAGRAPH 54.2
35.1. If the road referred to is the R537, I deny that it approaches Moutse
2 at all.
35.2. I deny that Walkraal is part of Moutse 2.
35.3. Save as set out above, this paragraph is admitted.
36. AD PARAGRAPHS 54.4 AND 54.5
36.1. I deny that Kgobokwane is in Moutse 2. Kgobokwane is in Moutse
3.
36.2. Ramokgeletsane is not part of Moutse 1 but is part of Siyabuswa
and belongs to Dr J S Moroka Municipality. 17
36.3. I deny further that the inhabitants of Kgobokwane are solely reliant
on the infrastructure of Siyabuswa. Instead, it would be more
accurate to say that the inhabitants of this area are reliant on the
infrastructure of Groblersdal and Marble Hall towns.
37. AD PARAGRAPH 55
37.1. I deny that ‘Moutse’ and Siyabuswa are one continuous,
interdependent settlement.
37.2. While there are no natural boundaries between the two areas, the
boundaries were determined according to the historical boundaries
of farmlands on which the villages are now situated.
37.3. The Moutse areas are interdependent with other areas within the
local and district municipalities in which they are situated.
37.4. Annexure WMR1, referred to in this paragraph, does not indicate
the precise location and extent of either Moutse or Siyabuswa, or the
surrounding areas. It does not support the conclusion that the area is
one continuous and interdependent settlement. 18
38. AD PARAGRAPH 56
38.1. I deny that Moutse remains an essentially cross-boundary area.
38.2. Moutse and Siyabuswa are both as separate and as interdependent as
any neighbouring rural areas.
39. AD PARAGRAPHS 57-72
39.1. I point out that the Moutse people made no objection to becoming
part of Lebowa.
39.2. I point out further that the Moutse communities were violently
opposed to becoming united with Siyabuswa.
39.3. This is incongruent with the assertions of unity with Siyabuswa
made in the founding papers by the applicants.
40. AD PARAGRAPH 73 19
40.1. The findings referred to in this paragraph, regarding planning,
development and infrastructure, are based on the situation as it was
over thirty years ago. I deny that they are relevant to the situation as
it is now.
40.2. Moutse shares links, not only with Siyabuswa, but also with
Groblersdal, Marble Hall, and the other Local Municipalities in the
District.
40.3. I refer in this regard to what is set out in the affidavit filed on behalf
of the second respondent, and the relevant annexures.
41. AD PARAGRAPH 75
41.1. I deny that the history and location of Moutse establish that
Siyabuswa and Moutse are a single geographical unit.
41.2. I admit that the infrastructure of Siyabuswa and Moutse were
inextricably linked at the time referred to, but deny that they are so
at this time. 20
41.3. I admit that boundary determination is an emotive and complex
issue in Moutse, and point out that this is the reason for the process
initiated by the second respondent, which is referred to in previous
affidavits filed on behalf of the second respondent, of
comprehensive consultation in the area in order to reconsider the
issues.
41.4. I deny that the importance of the issue to the applicants is sufficient
to displace all other considerations with regard to the appropriate
location of Moutse, both at municipal and at provincial level.
42. AD PARAGRAPH 76
For the reasons set out in this affidavit, read with the answering affidavit
filed on behalf of the second respondent, the contents hereof are denied.
43. AD PARAGRAPHS 77 TO 104
43.1. I refer to the contents of the answering affidavit filed on behalf of
the second respondent. 21
43.2. To the extent that the allegations contained herein are inconsistent
with those contained in the answering affidavit of the second
respondent, they are denied.
44. AD PARAGRAPH 107
44.1. In response to the allegations relating to the supply of water, I refer
to the supporting affidavit of Brian Ezekiel Mphosho Masenya
attached as “PCR4”.
44.2. I admit that there are, unfortunately, backlogs in water provision in
the former cross-boundary municipalities.
44.3. I point out that the backlogs are not limited to the Moutse areas.
Furthermore, backlogs have been reduced since incorporation into
Limpopo.
44.4. As set out above there are plans to upgrade water provisioning,
including the construction of a water treatment works in the
Sekhukhune District Municipality.
45. AD PARAGRAPH 107.1 22
Save as is consistent with the allegations contained in the supporting
affidavit of Masenya, these allegations are denied.
46. AD PARAGRAPH 107.2
This allegation is admitted.
47. AD PARAGRAPHS 107.3 AND 107.4
47.1. As Masenya points out in his supporting affidavit, there was a fault
in the design introduced by the Mpumalanga Province which
resulted in the areas of Ntwane, Thabakhubidu and Marapong not
receiving water. This is currently being addressed by the
Sekhukhune District Municipality.
47.2. Furthermore, the Operations and Maintenance department of the
Sekhukhune Municipality is embarking on a refurbishment of
boreholes in the area as a temporary measure for water supply.
47.3. Elandsoorn and the adjacent area of Tambo have always had an
adequate water supply. 23
47.4. Save as above the allegations contained herein are denied.
48. AD PARAGRAPH 107.4
48.1. Walkraal does have running water although the supply is poor. For
this reason the supply of water services is augmented by water
tankers.
48.2. The Weltevreden water treatment works (which supplies the
reservoir) referred to is largely supplying water to the Dr JS Moroka
municipality, Moutse 1 and 3 and Thembisile municipality.
48.3. There is not enough water in the Weltevreden water treatment works
(which supplies the reservoir) to supply the entire area of Moutse.
For this reason the Sekhukhune District Municipality has
undertaken the construction of its own water treatment works.
48.4. Save as above, these allegations are denied.
49. AD PARAGRAPHS 107.5 24
49.1. Only certain areas receive water in trucks. This problem will be
addressed once the new treatment works is completed which will
provide bulk water supply to the whole of Moutse 1 and 3. The
source of the water will be Loskop Dam.
50. AD PARAGRAPHS 107.6 TO 107.10
50.1. These allegations are denied.
50.2. The water trucks regularly deliver water to Walkraal. On average
water is trucked in once or twice a week.
50.3. The water carried by the trucks is purified from Weltevreden water
works. The water is therefore clean and drinkable.
51. AD PARAGRAPH 108
51.1. In respect of health services, I refer to the supporting affidavit of the
CEO of Philadelphia Hospital and Groblersdal Hospital,
Ntombizandile Jennifer Mabindisa (annexure “PCR6” hereto).
52. AD PARAGRAPH 108.1 25
52.1. Philadelphia hospital is a regional hospital, and serves not only
Moutse residents, but residents of the surrounding areas. Moutse
residents also receive healthcare from Groblersdal district hospital,
and from a number of community health clinics.
52.2. Where a patient requires tertiary health services, such a patient is
referred to one of five hospitals with which Philadelphia Hospital
has a collaboration agreement.
53. AD PARAGRAPH 108.2
53.1. These allegations are denied.
53.2. Philadelphia receives regular deliveries of medical supplies on a
weekly basis. This is confirmed by the Chief Executive Officer of
this Hospital (Ntombizandile Mabindisa whose supporting affidavit
is annexed marked “PCR6”) who states that she has never received
a report on a shortage of immunization medication.
53.3. In these circumstances the facts deposed to by Phiri in his
supporting affidavit are denied and he is put to the proof thereof. 26
54. AD PARAGRAPH 108.3
54.1. Philadelphia hospital is a regional hospital and provides all the
services it is authorised to provide including comprehensive health
services.
54.2. To the extent that the services referred to in the paragraph include
the services a regional hospital is expected to provide, the
allegations are denied.
54.3. Philadelphia hospital has always had a mortuary.
55. AD PARAGRAPH 108.4
I deny that corpses were sent from Philadelphia Hospital to mortuaries in
Gauteng as a matter of course.
56. AD PARAGRAPH 108.5
56.1. I deny that Limpopo has no co-operation agreement. 27
56.2. Patients who require services which Philadelphia Hospital is unable
to provide are transferred to hospitals in Gauteng as well as
Polokwane, depending on availability of beds and services.
57. AD PARAGRAPH 108.6
57.1. I have no precise knowledge of the precise cost of a round trip to
Polokwane or to Gauteng. I do however dispute that a round trip to
Gauteng costs around R50. To my knowledge, the average cost of a
round trip from Philadelphia Hospital to Johannesburg is in the
region of R150.
58. AD PARAGRAPH 108.7
This paragraph is noted.
59. AD PARAGRAPH 108.8
59.1. In relation to Masanabo’s claim that a fee was claimed for her
transfer to the hospital, I deny that a fee is charged for ambulance
transfer between clinics and hospitals in the area. 28
59.2. Limpopo Province administers the Emergency Medical Services,
and their policy does not allow for the charging of such a fee.
59.3. If Masanabo was indeed asked to pay for an ambulance transfer, this
was irregular.
60. AD THE AFFIDAVIT OF FANIE MOGOTJI
60.1. AD PARAGRAPH 4
These allegations are denied.
60.2. AD PARAGRAPH 6
60.2.1. These allegations are denied.
60.2.1.1. Philadelphia has a mortuary.
60.2.1.2. The only occasion where corpses are sent to
Polokwane is when the private mortuary selected 29
by the family receiving the corpse is in
Polokwane.
60.2.1.3. Bodies are released to families directly from
Philadelphia hospital.
60.3. AD PARAGRAPH 7
60.3.1. Transfer to a tertiary hospital depends on availability of
beds and on what type of service the patient requires.
60.3.2. There may have been a number of reasons why Mogotji’s
uncle had to be transferred to Polokwane. Given the
paucity of facts supplied by Mogotji I am unable to
comment further on the allegations made.
61. AD PARAGRAPH 109
61.1. In respect of education, I refer to the affidavit of Zwoitwaho
Nevhutalu, the Head of the Education Department in Limpopo
Province (annexure “PCR7” hereto). 30
62. AD PARAGRAPH 109.1
62.1. In accordance with National Policy Guidelines, Limpopo Province
provides transport to every learner whose place of residence is more
than 3 kilometres from the nearest school in the event that the
learner attends primary school. For secondary school the guidelines
requires that scholar transport be provided if the learner resides
more than 5 kilometres from the nearest school.
62.2. Learners who choose not to attend the school closest to their homes
will have to pay for their transport to the school of their choice.
63. AD PARARAPH 109.2
63.1. I deny that Limpopo has not implemented the revised curriculum.
63.2. According to Nevhutalu, Limpopo implemented the revised
curriculum in 2003, as all provinces were required to do, and has
provided the requisite training for educators.
64. AD PARAGRAPH 109.3 31
64.1. I admit that the Limpopo province does not provide for the posts of
general worker and administrative staff in their post establishment.
64.2. As indicated by Nevhutalu in his supporting affidavit,
administrative clerks are provided for Quintile 1 schools, which are
the poorest schools.
64.3. This policy is applied equitably throughout the province.
65. AD PARAGRAPH 109.4
I deny that Moutse schools are no longer adequately provided for.
66. AD PARAGRAPH 109.4.1
66.1. To the extent that the allegations contained herein are inconsistent
with the contents of Nevhutalu’s supporting affidavit, they are
denied.
66.2. Limpopo Province provides a generous allocation for “norms and
standards” from which schools are able to provide for their needs. 32
66.3. Currently, every school in Moutse has a photocopier which was
purchased using this allocation.
67. AD PARAGRAPH 109.4.2
These allegations are denied.
68. AD PARAGRAPH 109.4.3
68.1. Limpopo provides stationery for each learner according to subject-
and grade-specific guidelines.
69. AD THE AFFIDAVIT OF PHATLANE
69.1. AD PARAGRAPH 11
69.1.1. The only time parents have to buy extra stationery is if
teachers request stationery that is not specified in the
guidelines.
70. AD PARAGRAPH 109.4.4 33
70.1. To the extent that the allegations contained herein are inconsistent
with those contained in Nevhutalu’s affidavit, they are denied.
71. AD MATLOU’S AFFIDAVIT
71.1. AD PARAGRAPH 7
71.1.1. The only schools provided with security are two
Comprehensive schools, OR Tambo and St Joseph’s, which
have expensive equipment.
71.1.2. Other schools must pay for security from their “norms and
standards” budget. In the event that there is insufficient
money available, schools may apply to the Limpopo
Department of Education for money for security.
71.1.3. Security for OR Tambo (where Matlou is on the school
governing body) and St Joseph’s schools was discontinued
for a short while, due to some administrative hiccups, but
the service has now been resumed.
72. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5 34
72.1. I admit that there were initially some problems resulting from the
transfer to Limpopo Province. However, these problems have been
resolved.
73. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5.1
73.1. I deny that qualified teachers were denied permanent posts.
73.2. I refer to the affidavit of Nevhutalu. To the extent that the
allegations contained herein are inconsistent with those provided in
the affidavit of Nevhutalu, they are denied.
74. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5.2
74.1. In the period following the transfer to Limpopo, there were tensions
in the Moutse area which made it difficult for training to be
arranged.
74.2. All those administrative staff has since received training. Those who
currently require training also receive training.
75. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5.3 35
This allegation is admitted.
76. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5.4
76.1. I deny that Limpopo consistently fails to deliver salary advices
timeously.
76.2. I admit that, at the time of the transfer from Mpumalanga, there
were some interruptions in delivery of salary advice slips. This
problem was attributable to the fact that it was too dangerous for
Limpopo officials to travel into the Moutse area to deliver salary
slips.
76.3. However, that problem has been resolved.
76.4. I deny that any staff are currently prejudiced.
77. AD PARAGRAPH 109.5.5
77.1. I deny this allegation. 36
77.2. The system called Performance Management Development System
is not applied in schools, across the country. This system applies to
office-based officials only.
77.3. The performance evaluation system applied to schools is the
Integrated Quality Management System.
77.4. According to the records of the Limpopo Department of Education,
the IQMS has been properly applied throughout Limpopo province,
including Moutse.
78. AD PARAGRAPH 110.1
78.1. Social grants are processed and administered by the South African
Social Security Agency, which is a national body.
78.2. I am not able to proffer a reason for the delay in the processing of
the grants alleged by Mthombeni, but I point out that the South
African Social Security Agency Act came into force after her initial
application in 2003, and the different processes may have been a
factor. 37
79. AD PARAGRAPH 110.2
79.1. This allegation is denied
79.2. Dube has alleged isolated incidents about which I am unable to
comment, save to state that they are not a basis for a general
conclusion about consultation with the non-governmental sector.
80. AD PARAGRAPH 111
80.1. I point out that the march referred to by Dube took place in 2005,
when Mpumalanga was still responsible for the area.
81. AD PARAGRAPH 112
81.1. I refer to the affidavit of Sepena Mojapelo in this regard (“PCR8”
hereto).
81.2. I point out that there is a national moratorium, imposed in 2005, on
the issue of new taxi route licences, to facilitate the change from
permits to operating licences for taxis. As a result, no new 38
applications are accepted. Taxi operators have until the end of July
2009 to convert their permits into operating licences.
82. AD PARAGRAPH 112.1
82.1. To the extent that it is permitted, taxi operators may obtain
operating licences for more than one route, and in fact have done so.
83. AD PARAGRAPH 112.2
83.1. It is denied that the local transport network has collapsed, or that
only temporary licences are granted.
84. AD PARAGRAPH 112.3
84.1. Renewals can be done at Lebowakgomo.
84.2. I point out that taxi operating licences are valid for five years.
85. AD PARAGRAPH 112.4 39
85.1. These allegations are denied.
85.2. During the transfer from Mpumalanga to Limpopo, some hard
copies of files were misplaced and could not be found. However, all
the data was contained on a national database, so that it is now all
available on the provincial system, even if the hard copy is not
available.
86. AD PARAGRAPH 113
86.1. These allegations are denied.
86.2. Football is the most popular organised sport in the Moutse
community.
86.3. There are a number of South African Football Association
(“SAFA”) clusters operative in the Moutse area.
86.4. These clusters belong to the Metropolitan football league.
86.5. There are a significant number of football clubs active in the area.
Each club has its own training ground. 40
86.6. There are two sports stadia in the area, the larger of which is the OR
Tambo Stadium.
87. AD PARAGRAPH 114
87.1. I refer to the affidavit of Mojapelo (“PCR8” hereto).
87.2. I deny that roads are not maintained or upgraded.
88. AD PARAGRAPH 115
I deny that service delivery to Moutse was undermined by including it in
Limpopo rather than Mpumalanga.
89. AD PARAGRAPH 115.1
89.1. All long term plans have been transferred to Limpopo in terms of
the Implementation Protocol.
90. AD PARAGRAPH 115.2 41
90.1. I deny that the applicants have demonstrated a well-established and
entrenched connection with Mpumalanga.
90.2. This allegation is incongruent with the allegations that the Moutse
community only agreed to stay in Mpumalanga on condition that
Gauteng provide their services.
91. AD PARAGRAPH 115.3
91.1. I deny these allegations.
91.2. I refer to annexure WMR4 to the founding affidavit, at page 101 of
the record, which indicates that, by 1986, “KwaNdebele’s limited
infrastructure was razed to the ground”.
91.3. Groblersdal and Marble Hall have far more developed
infrastructures, and are close to and have links with Moutse 1 and 3.
Both Moutse 1 and 3 receive services from the relevant Local
Municipalities as well as the District Municipality.
92. AD PARAGRAPH 115.4 42
92.1. I point out that not one of these statements show any basis for the
contention that service delivery would necessarily deteriorate if
Moutse were transferred to Limpopo.
93. AD PARAGRAPH 116
93.1. I deny these allegations.
93.2. I submit that the affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent
has set out sufficient evidence of the reasons for the transfer of the
relevant areas to Limpopo, and that these were entirely congruent
with the objectives of the Amendment Act.
94. AD PARAGRAPH 117
This paragraph is denied.
95. I accordingly pray that this application be dismissed.
______P C RAMMUTLA
THUS DONE AND SIGNED BEFORE ME AT SANDTON ON THIS
THE DAY OF JULY 2009, THE DEPONENT HAVING ACKNOWLEDGED 43
THAT HE KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS OF THIS
DECLARATION AND CONSIDERS IT BINDING ON HIS CONSCIENCE, THE
REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN GOVERNMENT NOTICE NUMBER R1258 OF
21 JULY 1972, AS AMENDED, AND GOVERNMENT NOTICE NO R1648 OF 19
AUGUST 1977, AS AMENDED, HAVING BEEN COMPLIED WITH.
______COMMISSIONER OF OATHS