A campaign by Movement for CARE, supported by the People’s Legal Centre, says the way Cape Town elects its ward committees undermines democracy by excluding residents from elections.
In November, local government elections will most likely be held for the first time since the establishment of the Government of National Unity. The elections will decide which parties are represented in municipal councils. Shortly after the local government elections, municipalities will be required to establish ward committees.
Ward committees were established in section 73 of the Municipal Structures Act. They are intended to be the channels of communication between residents and higher municipal structures. Yet, many residents in Cape Town are frustrated with their ward committees.
Movement for CARE (M4C), supported by the People’s Legal Centre (PLC), has launched a campaign to pressure the City of Cape Town to change its ward committee rules to allow these committees to fulfil their function, which is to “enhance participatory democracy in local government”.
Ward Committee selection
Municipal councils comprise 50% proportional councillors (PRs) and 50% ward councillors. PRs represent political parties, while ward councillors are directly elected by the residents of the ward. Ward councillors automatically become the chairpersons of their area’s ward committee. Ward committees consist of ten seats plus the ward councillor.
In Cape Town, the ward councillor nominates various community sectors (health, safety, sports, etc.) they believe should be represented in their committee. These sectors are contained in a closed list, which omits some of the most pressing issues facing residents, such as housing, municipal services, healthcare, and transportation.
Organisations in the ward registered with the City that represent the proposed community sectors nominate candidates to fill the seat. If there are more nominated candidates than seats for a particular sector, elections are held with all the registered organisations for that seat.
Residents and registered voters are entirely excluded from this system – from sector determination to nomination, standing and voting.
Johannesburg has a similar system to Cape Town, but several other municipalities adopt a more democratic approach by involving the residents of the ward in the process. For example, Ekurhuleni, Nelson Mandela Bay, and eThekwini advertise elections and the public can vote for ward committee members.
A lack of participation
Section 73(3) requires a municipal council to “make rules regulating the procedure to elect … members of a ward committee”.
Cape Town’s ward committee rules are not so much elections as a process by which ward councillors hand-pick the sectors they believe best represent their area.
Such a system is ripe for exploitation, with ward councillors effectively able to select who gets to occupy seats on their committee by nominating sectors favouring specific registered organisations.
Secondly, this process removes public participation from a system of local governance specifically devised to respond to the needs of residents, ignoring the requirements of the Structures Act.
In our view, this is in conflict with the Constitution, although the matter has never been taken to the apex court.
Cape Town’s ward committee rules were first adopted in 2011, readopted in 2016, and again in 2022. Each time, the rules were adopted with no public input, yet the Constitution emphasises the importance of public participation in government decision-making.
To decide the rules on how these committees will be structured without participation by the people affected not only disregards crucial constitutional principles, it actively undermines the very purpose of ward committees.
Call to fix the rules
The M4C project, supported by the PLC, approaches the issue through community education and legal advocacy, potentially also litigation.
On the legal front, the City has acknowledged that new rules must be drafted. The City has agreed to embark on “formal legislative and public participation processes prescribed in City instruments”.
However, the City also said that only “registered organisations will be invited to contribute when Ward Committee Rules or related policies are formally reviewed”.
In December 2025, M4C responded that the City’s planned process engaged in the same undemocratic restrictions that underpin the ward committee current rules.
Residents have responded to the City’s reluctance to design an inclusive selection process. Some wards have drafted a formal set of expectations of their ward committees and councillors, addressing how members should communicate with residents and how residents can hold committee members accountable.
M4C and residents plan to present the City with their demands and a corresponding petition demanding a fair and participatory process for ward election rules before the next local elections.
There is an opportunity to influence the final ward election rules if enough wards and subcouncils engage in this process. The City should honour its commitment to create government structures that are both responsive to the needs of residents and grounded in the constitutional principles of participatory democracy and transparency.
Views expressed are not necessarily those of GroundUp.
© 2026 GroundUp. This article is published under the GroundUp Republication Licence Version 1.0. Email [email protected] to request permission to republish.
High illiteracy rates: High rates of illiteracy among adults.
spooky yellowjacket
Domkop – idiot [dom-kop] Similar to the German “dummkopf” or Dutch “domkop”, this term literally translates to “dumb head” and is a derogatory term used to describe someone who you think is stupid.Example: “Ag! You domkop! You broke my cell phone!”
Show Off
Fun South African Fact: South Africa has continuously paid tribute to Dr Christiaan Barnard’s groundbreaking medical achievements.