LESEGO MAHLANGU | Local government oversight under scrutiny as trust erodes

Over the past few weeks, there has been a mounting call for the extension of the Madlanga Commission.

This commission was constituted by the President to investigate the infiltration of criminal syndicates into SA’s law enforcement and legal bodies across all spheres of government. Investigations have already uncovered how these syndicates undermine law enforcement at the local level, leaving numerous officials in compromised positions.

Municipalities such as Ekurhuleni and Tshwane have reportedly become grounds for facilitating organised crime and suppressing both investigations and whistleblowers.

This occurs while municipalities operate under a direct constitutional mandate, reinforced by the Local Government (Municipal Structures) Act. This act provides the necessary framework for councils to strengthen oversight in areas such as monitoring, accountability and compliance.

Specifically, the section 79 and section 80 committees are established to execute these critical functions. Section 79 committees are formed by the municipal council to ensure elected councillors can hold the executive to account, while section 80 committees empower the executive to scrutinise administrative operations.

Ideally the composition of these structures should boost municipal councils’ ability to detect anything that threatens performance and service delivery. This relies heavily on ethical, responsible and sustainable practices — values directly undermined by corruption.

The mounting distrust of government structures stems from a series of failures across different levels. By design, the most vulnerable — the community — has been deliberately marginalised

It is within these structures that state resources should be protected. The current era of the Madlanga commission, like many before it, raises deep concerns about the state of these standing bodies meant to defend our democracy and those entrusted to see through these mechanisms.

At the heart of this democratic compromise lies the fragmentation of accountability lines, characterised by weak reporting structures, the politicisation of administrative functions, a lack of monitoring capacity and unchecked non-compliance, all while leaving the community in the dark.

Consequently the mounting distrust of government structures stems from a series of failures across different levels. By design, the most vulnerable — the community — has been deliberately marginalised. The logic follows that as fewer people are involved in the democratic process, those in power feel more emboldened to commit crimes that essentially steal from the developmental agenda and humanity.

The commission’s existence serves as a clarion call for South African society to pursue deep-seated institutional reform, specifically at the local government level. This is not merely a call for administrative adjustment but for a fundamental cultural shift — one that demands communities consistently participate in the active defence of our democracy.

The 2026 local government elections represent a pivotal moment for communities to reclaim their agency and realise the ideal of a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Rather than continuously relying on costly commissions, we must resolve to foster direct citizen participation.

Our goal must be a government that serves the common good and the interests of the majority, rather than the narrow interests of a political elite.

Recent events at the Constitutional Court have further underscored the urgency of this participation. The Phala Phala judgment ruled that parliament acted unlawfully in its 2022 vote to block an impeachment inquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa. The ConCourt found the parliamentary vote unconstitutional and ordered that an independent panel’s report be referred to an impeachment committee for proper consideration.

This year we cannot simply wait to vote; we must deepen our interest in understanding local government and its role in shaping our everyday realities

This judgment exposes how a parliamentary majority can be abused to bypass a public mandate and avoid accountability. It serves as a stark reminder that as long as we remain mere spectators, we are vulnerable to being reactionaries while state resources intended to advance our collective prosperity and equality are mismanaged. True democratic defence requires an engaged citizenry that ensures no individual or party is placed above the law.

Therefore this year we cannot simply wait to vote; we must deepen our interest in understanding local government and its role in shaping our everyday realities. Democracy cannot survive as an event that occurs only at the ballot box every five years.

It must live within communities that are informed, organised and actively engaged in the development of society. We must cultivate community engagements through community meetings that are not only spaces of demands and grievances but also platforms for collective problem-solving, resource mobilisation and shared responsibility for sustainable service delivery.

As Chinua Achebe reminds us: “A functioning, robust democracy requires a healthy, educated, participatory followership and an educated, morally grounded leadership.”

The future of our democracy, therefore, cannot rest solely in the hands of elected representatives but equally in the consciousness, participation and accountability of ordinary citizens.

We must look within ourselves and among each other to rebuild the social fabric necessary to enjoy the true promises of democracy, dignity and development.

• Mahlangu is a researcher in the City of Tshwane. She writes in her personal capacity.