Tshwane Residents Demand Accountability as Court Battle Over Corrupt Deputy Mayor Unfolds

Tshwane residents who rely on the municipality to spend their rates honestly now find themselves at the center of a High Court battle over whether their elected officials can be held to account.

The Democratic Alliance filed papers at the Gauteng High Court seeking to overturn a Council decision that shielded Deputy Executive Mayor Eugene Modise from serious consequences after he was found to have breached the Councillors’ Code of Conduct. The breach concerned Modise’s failure to legally disclose financial interests connected to Triotic Protection Services, a company that received millions of rands in contracts from the City of Tshwane.

The public dimension is hard to ignore. During Modise’s tenure as MMC for Finance, the municipality’s spending on security watchman services expanded into the hundreds of millions of rands, while his financial connections to a company benefiting from those City contracts remained hidden from public view. The City’s own forensic investigation uncovered the breach. What followed, however, was a decision by the ANC-ActionSA-EFF coalition that controls the Council to impose only a financial penalty on the ANC politician rather than pursue stronger disciplinary action.

That outcome is precisely what the DA is challenging in court.

The party argues the Council’s decision is unlawful and irrational, and that it undermines the integrity of local government. When politicians who violate conduct rules receive only minimal penalties, the DA contends, the Councillors’ Code of Conduct is reduced to optional guidance rather than binding law. For ordinary residents, that distinction matters: the Code exists to ensure that elected officials act in the public interest, not in their own.

Meanwhile, the case has exposed fault lines within Tshwane’s governing coalition. ActionSA, which shares power with the ANC and EFF in the municipality, voted alongside the ANC to protect Modise. The DA characterizes this alignment as evidence that ActionSA chose coalition loyalty over the conduct standards that residents depend on.

The DA’s court application asks the High Court to set aside the Council’s decision and remit the matter for reconsideration under what the party describes as the correct legal framework. In practice, that would require Modise to face the full weight of the disciplinary process, rather than settle for the penalty the coalition-controlled Council imposed.

The case reflects a persistent tension in South African local government. When a politician’s party controls the Council, disciplinary decisions can become exercises in protecting party members rather than enforcing standards. The DA’s decision to escalate to court signals a judgment that the normal municipal processes have, in this instance, failed to deliver accountability to the public.

For Tshwane’s residents, the stakes extend well beyond one councillor’s conduct. The outcome will signal whether breaches of the Councillors’ Code can be quietly minimized through party protection, or whether legal remedies remain a genuine check on that kind of arrangement. The DA has indicated it will provide updates as the case progresses, leaving an open question about what standard of accountability the courts will ultimately demand of those entrusted with managing public money.