ANC councillors challenge disputed candidate lists ahead of elections

Share current article via EmailShare current article via FacebookShare current article via TwitterShare current article via LinkedInMduduzi NonyaneOpens in new windowOpens in new windowEnter fullscreen mode displaying this image.ExpandANC members during the commemoration of Solomon Mahlangu in Mamelodi, Tshwane PHOTOS: ANTONIO MUCHAVE Story audio is generated using AI

An ANC Tshwane councillor has challenged the party’s selection of its Ward 28 candidate, alleging that she won the branch voting process but was overlooked in favour of another candidate ahead of the November local government elections.

Nomvula Seelane, the current Ward 28 councillor in Mamelodi’s Region 6, wants the Johannesburg high court to intervene in the nomination of Mamosa Phasha, arguing that the process was affected by alleged irregularities involving voter verification, voting materials and the participation of party members.

The application, filed on October 6, follows an internal dispute process in which the ANC’s provincial dispute resolution committee dismissed Seelane’s complaint and upheld the branch general meeting.

The dispute centres on three meetings held in June as part of the ANC’s candidate selection process.

In her founding affidavit, Seelane says the first branch general meeting, held on June 6, collapsed after a disagreement over the verification of participants and their eligibility to vote.

Six candidates had been put forward, including Seelane, Phasha, Neville Ndlovu, Tebogo Mabala, Kamogelo Ntlantleng and Sindiswa Nkosi.

The meeting ended without an announced result, prompting Seelane to challenge the way it had been conducted.

She alleges that the dispute over verification undermined the process and says her challenge was dismissed because she lacked documentary evidence at the time.

The process continued at a community public meeting on June 13, where Seelane says she received 81 votes against four for Ndlovu.

The final branch general meeting was held on June 19. Seelane alleges that it was again affected by disputes over the handling of voting materials and the verification process.

She claims that the voter register was withheld and that the scanner and ballot materials were removed from the venue without proper authority.

Seelane says the designated deployee, Joel Masilela, arrived at about 9pm, after which voting proceeded manually.

The results recorded in her affidavit were 110 votes for Seelane, six for Mabala, four for Ndlovu and two for Ntlantleng.

Despite these figures, Phasha was subsequently confirmed as the ANC’s Ward 28 candidate.

Seelane argues that the nomination did not comply with the ANC’s 2026 local government elections candidate selection rules, guidelines and procedures.

She says allowing the disputed nomination to stand would cause harm that could not be reversed if Phasha were permitted to contest the election before the dispute was resolved.

In her founding affidavit, Seelane states: “I have been an ANC member in good standing for a period of 17 years.”

She argues that her participation in the candidate selection process and her alleged victories at the branch meetings entitle her to challenge the decision to nominate Phasha.

The dispute had already been taken to the ANC’s internal structures before the court application was filed.

In a letter dated September 17, Seelane’s attorneys raised concerns about the conduct of the meetings, including the alleged exclusion of members, the handling of voting materials and questions about the officials responsible for overseeing the process.

The attorneys requested an investigation into the meetings held between June 6 and July 26, as well as verification of the membership registers, attendance records, scanner records, ballot papers and results.

They also asked the ANC to verify the relevant candidate’s qualification documentation and provide Seelane with the branch meeting packages and results.

The allegations raised by the disputant have been considered in their totality

The letter called on the party to refrain from treating the disputed outcome as final while the complaint remained unresolved.

However, the ANC’s provincial dispute resolution committee reached a different conclusion.

In its ruling dated July 24, the committee said it had considered Seelane’s allegations but found they did not justify setting aside the branch general meeting.

The committee stated: “The allegations raised by the disputant have been considered in their totality.”

It found that the allegations concerning the conduct of the meeting had not been sufficiently substantiated to justify setting aside the BGM.

The committee also considered complaints relating to the appointment of deployees, the verification of members and the alleged exclusion of members from voting. It concluded that the allegations did not establish sufficient grounds to invalidate the meeting or its outcome.

The ruling stated: “The Ward 28 BGM and the outcomes thereof are accordingly upheld.”

The committee further urged party structures to prioritise organisational unity and discipline in the run-up to the local government elections.

Its decision is central to the court dispute because it shows that Seelane’s complaint was considered internally but did not persuade the committee to overturn the branch meeting.

Seelane, however, maintains that the internal process did not resolve the issues she raised and has now asked the court to intervene.

The application names the ANC Gauteng provincial task team, the ANC, the ANC elections committee, Phasha and the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) as respondents.

The Sunday Times made several attempts to obtain comment from ANC spokesperson Mahlengi Bhengu-Motsiri but had not received a response by publication time. Calls were not answered, and a written enquiry went unanswered.

ANC Greater Tshwane regional spokesperson Joel Masilela also did not respond to a written enquiry or answer calls.

The allegations in Seelane’s founding affidavit have not been established by a court. The ANC’s internal committee upheld the branch meeting, while the court application seeks intervention in the disputed nomination.

Seelane’s challenge comes amid other disputes over the ANC’s candidate selection process ahead of the November local government elections. In Cape Town, ANC councillor Anele Gabuza challenged the nomination of Yanga Mjingwana, seeking an order confirming him as the lawful candidate or requiring the selection process to be repeated.

In Matlosana in the North West, three councillors — Lehlohonolo Fortunate Mahogen, Gabriel Pakiso Mqikela and Thabo Matsau — also approached the high court over their exclusion from the party’s candidate lists, alleging that branch-level voting outcomes had been improperly altered. Mqikela reportedly said he received 248 votes during community nominations and 106 at a subsequent branch meeting before being removed from the list.

In Buffalo City in the Eastern Cape, ANC members also raised concerns about the selection of councillor candidates, alleging that branch nominations had been bypassed in the final choices. Separately, ANC members from Tshwane and Johannesburg marched to Luthuli House in September to protest candidate lists they claimed did not reflect branch voting outcomes. While the disputes differ in their circumstances and legal status, they raise questions about how branch-level nominations are reflected in the party’s final candidate lists.

The allegations remain contested and do not, in themselves, establish that the selection processes were unlawful.

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.