Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Velenkosini Hlabisa says municipal managers facing criminal charges can remain in office, but councils may take disciplinary action depending on the circumstances of each case.
Image: Doctor Ngcobo / Independent Newspapers
Municipal managers facing criminal charges are not automatically required to vacate their positions while awaiting the outcome of their criminal trials, Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Velenkosini Hlabisa has said.
Hlabisa said criminal proceedings against a municipal manager did not, on their own, disqualify the official from continuing to serve, as accused persons remained presumed innocent until proven guilty.
His response came after Democratic Alliance (DA) MP Anna van Zyl asked whether municipal managers facing criminal trials should remain actively in office pending the outcome of their cases.
“As the Minister, I do not condone corruption, misconduct or any conduct that undermines ethical administration, good governance or public confidence in municipalities,” Hlabisa said in a Parliamentary reply.
“However, the institution of criminal proceedings against a municipal manager does not, in itself, automatically disqualify the municipal manager from continuing to serve in office pending the outcome of the criminal trial.”
Hlabisa said the Constitution guaranteed every accused person the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.
He stressed, however, that the presumption of innocence did not mean councils had to ignore serious allegations or wait for a criminal trial to conclude before taking action within their responsibilities as employers.
Criminal proceedings and employment-related disciplinary proceedings were separate processes, he said.
Where the conduct underlying criminal charges could also constitute a breach of the Municipal Systems Act, the applicable Code of Conduct, the municipal manager’s employment contract or other employment obligations, Hlabisa said the municipal council must assess whether separate disciplinary or precautionary action was warranted.
Hlabisa said councils should consider the nature and seriousness of the charges, whether the alleged conduct was connected to the municipal manager’s official responsibilities and whether there was a possibility of interference with municipal records, witnesses or investigations.
Councils should also consider the official’s ability to continue performing the functions of the office, the municipality’s operational and service-delivery interests and the need to preserve public confidence in the administration..
“Depending on the facts and circumstances of the particular matter, the municipal council may institute disciplinary proceedings and, where lawfully justified, adopt appropriate precautionary measures while the allegations are under investigation or adjudication,” he said.
Any action taken against a municipal manager must comply with the applicable legislative, labour and disciplinary framework and should not be imposed as a substitute for a finding of guilt.
Hlabisa said the position could change where a municipal manager was convicted of an offence affecting their suitability to hold office, or was found guilty and dismissed following properly constituted disciplinary proceedings.
In such cases, the council must implement the consequences required by the applicable legal and employment framework.
Hlabisa said there was therefore no blanket rule requiring municipal managers facing criminal trials to either remain in office or vacate their positions solely because criminal proceedings had commenced.
“Each case must be assessed on its own facts,” he said.
Respecting the presumption of innocence should not prevent municipalities from taking lawful and proportionate action to protect their administration, resources, service delivery and integrity, he added.
**IOL Politics **
Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now
Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now
