DA puts Mnyimba on terms

Leave now!

News with intent!

Your advertising is only as good as the people who see it – repeatedly! You want to do business with OO readers – people with money and control of corporate budgets. Click here

By: TwitterButtons.com

Oudtshoorn. 15 August 2012. 12h15. The DA served the following letter on Thandekile Mnyimba, illicitly arrogating as the Municipal Manager, earlier today.
___________________

13 August 2012

The Municipal Manager

Mr. Thandekile Mnyimba

Dear Sir,

We note with concern that you have failed to vacate your office in flagrant disregard of the decision of the High Court (Case nr. 2579011 1) in terms of which your appointment was declared null and void ab initio.

You are likewise in default regarding the implementation / execution of Municipal Council resolution of 26th July 2012.

We cite you in this letter as Municipal Manager not because we recognise you to be in that position but purely as a matter of exigence and in view of the fact that for unfathomable reasons you still occupy the chair of the Municipal Manager.

We must advise you that you are obliged by law to implement council decisions whatever your opinion or any other person’s opinion may be as to the validity thereof.

For your convenience we quote hereunder from the judgment in the matter Manana v. King Sabata Dalindyebo Municipality where Nugent A.J. found, with reference to the matter Grace v MC Culloch 1908 th 165 as follows at paragraph 22:

Although that case was decided a considerable time ago we were referred to no subsequent authority that conflicts with it and I know of none. And although this case must be decided under a different constitutional dispensation I can see no new principle that drives one in another direction. On the contrary, it seems to me that it would be conducive to disorderly public administration if officials were entitled to choose between executing or not executing a duly adopted resolution of the council depending upon their belief as to its validity – whether or not the belief is well-founded. In the absence of authority to that effect, or a principled explanation for why that should be so, neither of which is before us, I think the submission must be rejected. A municipal council acts through its resolutions. No doubt a municipal council is entitled to rescind or alter its resolutions. And no doubt an interested party is entitled to challenge its validity on review. But once a resolution is adopted in my view its officials are bound to execute it, whatever view they might have on the merit of the resolution, in law or otherwise, until such time as it is either rescinded or set aside on review.

For your added convenience and information we have [bolded] the appropriate portion thereof.

You are hereby urged to follow the honourable and lawful route by implementing the above-mentioned council decision vacating your premisses immediately.

If you fail to comply as requested above we will be obliged to take the neccessary steps to give effect to the Council decision which steps will include having you removed.

Yours faithfully,

Cllr Chris Macpherson

Chief Whip DA/Cope Alliance

CC: Oftice of The Minister of Local Government, Western Cape Parliament, The Honourable Minister Anton Bredell
____________________

In the meantime DA Councillors Julia le Roux and Ben van Wyk this morning refused to take part in a Corporate Services Portfolio Committee Meeting on the grounds that the Administration refuses to implement Council resolutions.

Le Roux and Van Wyk were informed – I kid you not – that the relevant matter (the Resolution mentioned in the letter above) was “sub judice”.

Ye gods and faeries!

Not only is the administration lethargic and partisan; it is clearly also plain stupid!

Is not the Director Corporate Services an “advocate”!? Should not he, learned as he is, know better!?

Click here to receive updates.

Advertise on OO!

Click here to return to the title page.

One thought on “DA puts Mnyimba on terms

  1. What “sub judice”? Who determined that the matter is sub judice? That matter will be discussed no matter what Konradie/Conradie/Korabie/Patel is saying. It is has now become clear that Mnyimba did not accede to the letter from the DA. So what now? When you put someone on terms you must be serious and be willing and able to deal with the matter in accordance with what you are promising in your letter. Time is certainly running out for those who are in control of Verwardplein.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s