Why the Central Karoo investigation is back in court
Nearly four years after the fundraiser, the central questions are still caught between competing accounts and legal arguments. The court may now decide whether investigators finally complete the paper trail or whether the investigation has reached the end of the road.
A long-running dispute over money raised for service delivery in the Central Karoo has returned to court, reopening questions that have followed Patriotic Alliance leader Gayton McKenzie since his time as district mayor.
McKenzie, who is now the national minister of sport, arts and culture, has applied to the Gauteng High Court to end a provincial government investigation into fundraising undertaken during his mayoral term in 2022. He argues that the investigation has exceeded the period allowed by law and has reached into matters beyond the province’s authority.
Western Cape local government MEC Anton Bredell disagrees. He has confirmed that the province will oppose the application, setting the stage for another legal contest over the investigation’s powers, limits and unfinished work.
How the dispute began
The controversy stretches back to McKenzie’s brief period as mayor of the Central Karoo District Municipality. During that time, he promoted an ambitious programme aimed at addressing neglected services in Beaufort West and surrounding communities.
A fundraising dinner called Bring New Life to the Desert was held at a Sandton hotel in May 2022. Tickets reportedly cost R2,000 per person, while tables were offered at different prices. The money was intended to support projects such as replacing pit toilets, repairing a municipal swimming pool and restoring other local infrastructure.
Questions later emerged over how the proceeds were handled. Instead of being deposited into the municipality’s official bank account, the funds were administered through a private arrangement.
McKenzie maintains that the money was raised in his personal capacity and did not belong to the municipality. He has also said that promised projects were completed, with some work supported by his own money.
The provincial government takes a different view, with the position that the fundraiser was connected to McKenzie’s work as mayor, promoted municipal projects and used funds to perform work that would ordinarily fall within local government’s responsibilities. That relationship, it argues, creates a legitimate basis for scrutiny.
What a Section 106 investigation does
Bredell launched the Section 106 investigation in August 2023 under the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act. This provision allows a provincial MEC to investigate allegations of maladministration, fraud, corruption or other serious malpractice within a municipality.
Such an investigation is not, by itself, a finding of guilt. The purpose is to gather records, trace decisions and establish whether municipal systems were used lawfully. No final report has established that McKenzie committed corruption. The unresolved issue is whether investigators should be allowed to complete their work and obtain all the documents they consider relevant.
The first court order
The dispute reached the Western Cape High Court in 2024 after investigators struggled to obtain information from McKenzie and other parties.
In June 2024, the court ordered McKenzie and the other respondents to cooperate. Judge Rosheni Allie rejected the argument that the private character of the fundraising automatically placed it beyond municipal oversight. The judgment noted that the money had been raised while McKenzie was mayor and used to carry out work on municipal property.
McKenzie challenged that outcome through several legal avenues. According to the Western Cape Government, appeals were pursued through the High Court, the Supreme Court of Appeal, the president of that court and ultimately the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court dismissed the matter in April, exhausting that appeal process.
That appeared to clear the way for the Central Karoo investigation to continue. The latest application has now opened a different legal front.
Why McKenzie has returned to court
McKenzie’s new case focuses largely on time and jurisdiction. According to reporting by NovaNews, his court papers argue that Section 106 requires an investigation report to be submitted within a prescribed period. He contends that this period expired years ago, meaning investigators no longer have the authority to continue.
He also argues that the probe has moved beyond municipal administration and into private financial affairs. From this perspective, the case is no longer about whether service-delivery projects were completed, but whether provincial investigators may examine the account through which privately raised money was managed.
Bredell argues that this interpretation would create a dangerous loophole. If an investigation could be defeated simply by delaying cooperation until its reporting period expired, officials could potentially run down the clock and avoid scrutiny.
The court will now have to consider how the statutory time limit should work when an investigation has been slowed by disputes over access to information.
Why the outcome is important on the local level
There is a much more important practical concern behind the political clash. Residents were told that money had been raised in the name of improving their communities. They have a reasonable interest in knowing how much was collected, where it was held and how every portion was spent.
The case could also affect future municipal accountability investigations across South Africa. A ruling in McKenzie’s favour may restrict how long provinces have to complete Section 106 inquiries. A ruling for Bredell may confirm that investigations can continue when delays arise from efforts to secure documents or enforce cooperation.
Another court case means another wait for Central Karoo residents. Nearly four years after the fundraiser, the central questions are still caught between competing accounts and legal arguments. The court may now decide whether investigators finally complete the paper trail or whether the investigation has reached the end of the road.
Tessa Vaughn
Liz Thorne
Mariana Balt
Charlotte Hayes
Comments ()