The Electoral Court in Bloemfontein dismissed the United Democratic Front’s urgent application to bypass candidate nomination deadlines for the 2026 local government elections.
The newly registered party wanted special permission to nominate candidates after the official deadline passed. The court ruled on 4 September that the Electoral Commission (IEC) cannot grant exemptions to statutory deadlines.
Judge L.R. Adams delivered the judgment after an urgent hearing on 28 August. Acting judge N. Mangcu-Lockwood and Professor M. Phooko agreed with the decision.
The case adds to mounting election chaos as the ANC fights a separate battle with the IEC. The ruling party missed the 28 August deadline to register 181 candidates across parts of the Eastern Cape, Free State and KwaZulu-Natal.
Registration delays leave party scrambling
The UDF only completed its registration as a political party on 24 August. This timing left the party with just four days to prepare candidates for roughly 110 wards in Cape Town.
The party needed to identify candidates, complete selection processes and obtain written consent before the 28 August deadline at 17:00. The UDF realised it could not meet this timeline.
The party initially asked the court for a deadline extension. By the hearing date, it changed its request to a “placeholder proposal” instead.
Court rejects placeholder candidate scheme
The UDF wanted to nominate one person across multiple wards as a placeholder. The party planned to replace these placeholder candidates with actual candidates by 4 September.
Judge Adams rejected this strategy as legally impossible. The court found that substituting candidates after the deadline equals submitting new late nominations.
The Municipal Electoral Act sections 11(3) and 17(1) strictly prohibit this practice. The court also noted that nominating people who never intended to contest those wards violates section 69(1).
This section bans making false declarations. “The commission must not be placed in a situation where it has to make ad hoc decisions about political parties and candidates who have not complied with the Act,” Adams wrote.
Party blamed for own delays
The judgment found the UDF created its own emergency. The party took seven weeks to submit physical copies of registration paperwork after its electronic submission.
The court criticised the UDF for not preparing candidates while waiting for registration approval. Registration only applies to submitting nominations, not campaign preparation work.
The party could have recruited and vetted candidates during the registration process. This parallel preparation would have prevented the time crunch.
The court dismissed the application with no costs order. This standard practice protects constitutional litigants from paying state costs unless their case proves frivolous or vexatious.
ANC faces similar deadline dispute
The ANC blames “technical glitches” on the IEC’s online system for missing its candidate registration deadline. The ruling party plans to take the matter to the Electoral Court.
The IEC firmly rejects these claims. The commission says its system worked perfectly and the ANC simply left submissions until the last minute.
The IEC refuses to reopen registration. The ANC faces potential disqualification from dozens of local council seats unless the court intervenes in their favour.
The rigid enforcement of deadlines aims to preserve electoral process integrity. Courts view consistent application of rules as essential for maintaining the IEC’s perceived neutrality.
ALSO READ: IEC rejects ANC claims over candidate nomination deadline
