Ranyane judgment reserved
Oarabile Mosikare | Tuesday December 9, 2014 16:09
Led by Hebee Karakus, the applicants are complaining about the manner in which the decision and procedure were done. They have engaged attorneys, Onalethata Kambai and Joram Matomela, to argue on their behalf. Kambai submitted that the respondent, the Gantsi District Council (GDC), has operated the borehole for many years. He said the engine was removed in 2011 and returned in 2012.
“The council is now not providing diesel or maintenance of the engine. There was no consultation and meeting with the residents. It was an arbitrary decision and in the papers, the respondent failed to attach a resolution,” he submitted. He added that water is a prerequisite to enjoyment of human life. He also said the reasoning that the borehole was terminated because it was dominated by Tswana speaking people violated the Constitution.
“The decision to take the engine away and stop the provision of fuel was arbitrary. The hope was to make life difficult for them so that they relocate from Ranyane against their will.” He also argued that there was no resolution attached when Ipelegeng was stopped, adding that the programme was the sole source of employment at Ranyane. “The decision was arbitrary and a violation of legitimate expectation.”
In response, attorney Eric Botshelo appearing with Silver Moeng submitted the decision to terminate services in Ranyane was an administrative one, not taken during a full council meeting. Botshelo said when the engine was removed, it was for the purpose of maintenance and it was later returned to the area. He also argued that Ranyane is located within the wildlife management area.
“The applicants say that they were never consulted but we maintain that they were consulted. We maintain that the applicants have the right to access water at their own expenses,” stated Botshelo. He added that the council also undertook a house-to-house campaign to enlighten the residents. He also maintained that there was consultation when the council terminated Ipelegeng services.
“The reasons are clear. There were no funds when Ipelegeng and the projects were discontinued in July 2013.” He said the council was not the water authority but Water Utilities Corporation. The same was the case with the clinic, which falls under the Ministry of Health, not the local authority.
Disputing Botshelo’s submissions, Matomela argued that house-to-house consultation was for the relocation from Ranyane to other settlements. “Consultation cannot be made accompanied by threats. The executive arm of the council, which is a body corporate, cannot make a grave decision like this one without the knowledge of the political arm of the council,” said Matomela.