PRETORIA, Monday 12 October 2026 — African National Congress (ANC) councillor Nomvula Joyce Seelane has approached the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg to challenge the party’s selection of Mamosa Phasha as its candidate for Ward 28 in Tshwane, alleging irregularities in the nomination process ahead of the 4 November local government elections.
Seelane, the sitting councillor for Ward 28 in Mamelodi, claims that she secured the most votes during the party’s internal selection process but was subsequently overlooked.
The court application, filed on 6 October, follows an unsuccessful attempt to resolve the dispute through the ANC’s provincial structures.
According to court papers reported by TimesLIVE on Monday, Seelane is seeking judicial intervention in the decision to nominate Phasha.
Councillor disputes branch voting process
The dispute concerns a series of ANC branch meetings held during June as part of the party’s preparations for the municipal elections.
Seelane alleges that the first branch general meeting, held on 6 June, collapsed following disagreements about the verification of participating members and their eligibility to vote.
Six prospective candidates had been nominated, including Seelane and Phasha.
A subsequent community meeting took place on 13 June.
According to Seelane’s affidavit, she received 81 votes at that meeting, compared with four votes for another prospective candidate, Neville Ndlovu.
A further branch general meeting was held on 19 June.
Seelane alleges that the meeting was affected by irregularities involving the voter register, verification equipment and ballot materials.
She claims that voting proceeded manually after the arrival of an ANC official responsible for overseeing the process.
The results recorded in her affidavit indicate that she received 110 votes, while three other candidates received a combined 12 votes.
Despite those figures, Phasha was subsequently confirmed as the ANC’s Ward 28 candidate.
Seelane argues that the decision did not comply with the party’s candidate-selection rules and procedures.
The voting figures and allegations form part of her court challenge and have not been established as findings by a court.
ANC committee rejected internal complaint
Before approaching the High Court, Seelane challenged the nomination through the ANC’s internal dispute-resolution process.
The party’s Gauteng provincial dispute resolution committee considered complaints concerning the conduct of the meetings, membership verification and the participation of eligible voters.
In a ruling dated 24 July, the committee found that the allegations had not been sufficiently substantiated to justify overturning the branch meeting.
It upheld the meeting and its outcome.
No repeat nomination process was ordered.
Seelane subsequently instructed attorneys to raise further concerns about the selection process.
In correspondence dated 17 September, her legal representatives requested an investigation into the meetings and access to records including membership registers, attendance documents, voting materials and results.
The dispute remained unresolved, prompting the court application.
Court asked to intervene before election
Seelane argues that allowing the disputed nomination to proceed could cause harm that cannot be reversed once the election has taken place.
Her application names the ANC, its Gauteng provincial task team, the party’s elections committee, Phasha and the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) as respondents.
The inclusion of the IEC reflects the potential implications of the dispute for the official candidate nomination process.
However, the application does not establish wrongdoing by the commission.
The ANC’s internal committee has already upheld the disputed nomination, and no court has ruled that the selection process was unlawful.
TimesLIVE reported that attempts to obtain comment from ANC national spokesperson Mahlengi Bhengu-Motsiri and Greater Tshwane regional spokesperson Joel Masilela were unsuccessful before publication.
Candidate disputes continue across ANC structures
The Tshwane application adds to several disputes involving ANC candidate selections ahead of the municipal elections.
In the City of Matlosana in North West, three sitting ANC councillors previously approached the High Court to challenge their exclusion from the party’s candidate lists.
Those councillors allege that branch-level voting outcomes were improperly altered during the nomination process.
A separate dispute in Cape Town involves ANC councillor Anele Gabuza, who challenged the nomination of another candidate for Ward 98.
The cases concern different municipalities and nomination decisions.
They are also separate from the ANC’s Constitutional Court challenge over candidates excluded after the party failed to complete submissions through the IEC’s online nomination system before the statutory deadline.
The Constitutional Court is scheduled to hear that matter on Monday.
Election timetable increases urgency
The IEC published the final list of qualifying candidates on 16 September.
The commission confirmed that 136,790 candidates had met the statutory requirements to contest the 4 November elections.
With voting approaching, disputes over nominations have become increasingly urgent for political parties and affected candidates.
Court proceedings may determine whether particular internal party decisions were lawful, although any resulting changes would also have to be considered against the applicable electoral legislation and timetable.
In Tshwane, the immediate question is whether the High Court will intervene in the ANC’s decision to nominate Phasha.
Until a court rules otherwise, the party’s internal decision remains the outcome of its candidate-selection process.
The matter adds to the ANC’s organisational challenges as it prepares to contest the capital city’s municipal council elections.
