PRETORIA, Gauteng — ActionSA has strongly defended its use of single-candidate proportional representation (PR) lists for the upcoming local government elections, following the Democratic Alliance’s (DA) decision to take the matter to the Electoral Court. The DA is challenging ActionSA and several other political parties for submitting only one candidate on their PR lists for the municipalities they are contesting, arguing that the tactic is executed in bad faith.
In response to the legal challenge, ActionSA Chairperson Michael Beaumont has pushed back against the allegations, clarifying the party’s electoral strategy and accusing the DA of attempting to disenfranchise a significant portion of the South African electorate.
Legality and Precedent of List Supplementation
Addressing the core of the DA’s challenge, Beaumont clarified that ActionSA is not fielding a single candidate across multiple PR lists, but rather submitting one candidate on each individual municipal PR list. He argued that this practice is fully supported by Section 17 of Schedule 1 of the Municipal Electoral Act, which allows political parties to supplement their lists after an election if they secure more seats than they have candidates listed.
Beaumont emphasized that this is a standard practice utilized by various political parties across multiple election cycles. He pointed out that the DA has also employed this strategy, claiming to have identified at least 13 municipalities in the current election cycle where the DA has submitted a single person on a PR list.
Voter-Driven PR Lists vs. “Smoke-Filled Rooms”
A key pillar of ActionSA’s defense is its candidate selection policy. Beaumont explained that the party’s PR lists are intentionally structured in descending order based on the performance of their ward candidates. When a ward candidate is not elected but performs exceptionally well, they are elevated to the PR list.
“What’s quite important to explain is that this is not what is being mischaracterized as an effort to conceal something from the South African people,” Beaumont stated. He contrasted ActionSA’s transparent approach with the internal selection processes of other parties, arguing that ActionSA allows voters to directly shape their PR lists rather than relying on decisions made in “smoke-filled rooms” by party bosses.
Beaumont noted that a ward candidate might secure 40% of the vote in a highly contested field of over 50 candidates. While this may not be enough to win the ward seat outright, he described it as an exceptional result that demonstrates strong voter support and a clear vision for service delivery.
Addressing the “Supplement” Argument and Electoral Implications
When questioned on whether submitting a single name constitutes an abuse of the legislative spirit to “supplement” a list, Beaumont argued that the candidates are already subjected to intense public scrutiny because they are actively standing on the ward ballots. Therefore, he maintained, it is not a loophole but a transparent provision of the law.
He also addressed scenarios where ActionSA ward candidates do win their seats, noting that no political party wins a majority of all wards, with governing parties typically securing around 30%. Consequently, there will always be high-performing ward candidates who require PR allocation to ensure proportional representation.
Concerns Over Voter Disenfranchisement
Beyond the technicalities of the Municipal Electoral Act, Beaumont framed the DA’s Electoral Court application as a broader threat to South Africa’s democratic process. He warned that by asking the courts to prevent parties from supplementing their lists, the DA is effectively seeking to disenfranchise the voters who support these parties.
Beaumont highlighted that the collective group of parties utilizing this list strategy represents roughly 25% of the South African electorate based on the 2024 national election results. He accused the DA of showing a sinister interest in disqualifying these votes, suggesting the ruling party is attempting to develop a “qualified franchise” rather than competing for voter support.
As the Electoral Court prepares to hear the matter, the outcome will have significant implications for how political parties structure their candidate lists and navigate proportional representation in South Africa’s local government elections.
