'Toyi toyi, but pay rates'

An advocate representing the scandal-prone Moqhaka Municipality in Free State yesterday told Constitutional Court judges that residents who were disgruntled over poor service delivery should take to the streets instead of withholding their rates payments.

Jimmy Claasen is representing the municipality in the case involving Olga Rademan, a Kroonstad resident who took it to court in 2009 for disconnecting her electricity following her refusal to pay for rates and taxes because of poor, "sometimes non-existent" municipal services.

Rademan, a member of the Moqhaka Ratepayers and Residents Association, and other residents withheld their payments of property rates in protest against poor service delivery. She did, however, pay for her other services, including electricity.

But the municipality told her that, in terms of credit control bylaws and the Municipal Systems Act, Moqhaka was entitled to disconnect her electricity supply for non-payment even if the terminated service was paid for.

After losing the case in the Kroonstad Magistrate's Court, Moqhaka successfully appealed the case in the Bloemfontein High Court. Rademan approached the Constitutional Court after the Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's ruling.

Yesterday, Constitutional Court deputy chief justice Dikgang Moseneke asked what remedy was available to residents who, according to regulations, were obliged to pay for services despite receiving poor or no service.

"The law is quite clear that nobody is obliged to pay for bad service or no service," he said.

After Claasen said residents had a choice to approach the courts instead of taking the law into their own hands, Justice Johann van der Westhuizen wanted to know what residents who were not privileged enough to approach courts should do.

"Definitely not withholding payment. [The] court agrees that [that] is a recipe for chaos. Unfortunately, it is the ballot box or demonstrations . That is happening and seemingly it works ... Municipalities are now complying with their obligations, and then the legal way ... to approach the courts for an interdict. I can't think of another way forward for a disgruntled taxpayer in a municipality unfortunately," Claasen said.

Earlier, advocate Dannie du Preez, who represents Rademan and others, argued that, according to the Electricity Regulation Act, Moqhaka had no right to terminate her electricity. He argued that this law should supersede the Municipal Systems Act because it was recently legislated by parliament.

Judgment was reserved.

Should the court rule against Moqhaka, the judgment could set a precedent and possibly see disgruntled residents in other municipalities withholding payments.

Moqhaka caused a stink in 2011 when it was revealed that it still had unenclosed toilets despite having money for the project.