The City of Johannesburg has dismissed suggestions that political pressure or the G20 summit influenced its removal of a banner erected by Solidarity along the M1 motorway, saying the decision was based solely on the organisation’s failure to comply with outdoor advertising by-laws.
The Solidarity banner along M1 read: “Welcome to South Africa, the most race‑regulated country in the world.”
Solidarity launched an urgent application in the Gauteng high court last week, accusing the city of acting unlawfully when it removed the banner. But on Monday, the union withdrew its demand that the city concede wrongdoing and agreed to collect the banner from municipal offices, a move the city says mirrors an offer it made days earlier.
According to the city, the dispute stems from Solidarity’s “unlawful” installation of the banner on city-owned property without an application or approval, as required under the Outdoor Advertising By-Laws of 2009.
Officials removed the banner on this basis, the City of Joburg said, rejecting claims that the action was linked to the G20 or any other external pressure.
“This is the sole reason for the banner’s removal,” the statement reads. “The city simply cannot stand by without acting to stop the flagrant disregard of its by-laws.”
Solidarity approached the court seeking an order compelling the city to reinstate or return the banner. To avoid what it called unnecessary litigation and public expense, the city offered to hand back the banner on the condition that it would not be reinstalled until Solidarity followed proper processes.
The offer was initially rejected, with Solidarity insisting that the city admit to unlawful conduct, a demand the municipality “categorically rejected”.
After the city filed its answering affidavit, which it said outlined multiple flaws in Solidarity’s case, the union returned with a settlement proposal on November 17.
Solidarity asked that the matter be removed from the court roll and that it be allowed to collect the banner, abandoning its call for an admission of wrongdoing.
The city accepted the proposal, describing it as “practically identical” to what it had already put on the table on November 14.
Reaffirming its position, the city said it will continue enforcing its by-laws “consistently and transparently, regardless of the identity of the perpetrators”.
“The rule of law enjoins the city and everyone, including Solidarity, to act in accordance with the law at all times.”
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.