For many South Africans, democracy is experienced through the municipality: whether water flows from the tap, refuse is collected, roads are maintained and someone responds when a community raises a concern. These everyday encounters shape how citizens understand government and whether they believe democratic institutions serve their interests. As the country approaches the local government elections, the debate must therefore extend beyond which political party will win. It must also consider whether the election will strengthen the relationship between citizens and those entrusted with governing them.
Local government occupies a central place in South Africa’s democratic project. It is the sphere of government closest to communities and carries a constitutional responsibility to promote accountable government, sustainable services and social and economic development. Municipalities are consequently more than administrative institutions. They are spaces in which the commitments to dignity, equality and participation must find practical expression. When a municipality fails to fulfil its responsibilities, the consequences extend beyond inconvenience. They affect livelihoods, deepen existing inequalities and undermine confidence in the democratic system.
The forthcoming elections take place against persistent concerns about municipal governance. The Auditor-General’s consolidated report for 2024-25 records that only 39 of 257 municipalities achieved clean audits. Although audit outcomes cannot explain every aspect of municipal performance, they provide an important indication of weaknesses in financial management, compliance and accountability. These weaknesses matter because public resources must translate into public benefit. Communities cannot be expected to accept repeated explanations of institutional failure while the conditions under which they live continue to deteriorate.
However, the discussion should avoid treating all municipal challenges as the product of one cause. Corruption and political interference require decisive attention, but financial constraints, infrastructure backlogs, skills shortages and uneven administrative capacity also shape municipal performance. Poverty limits the revenue that some municipalities can collect, while historical spatial inequalities make service provision particularly difficult in underserved areas. An honest election debate must acknowledge these conditions without allowing them to become permanent excuses. Political leadership must demonstrate how it intends to govern within these constraints and address them.
This places a responsibility on political parties to improve the substance of their campaigns. Communities deserve commitments that explain what will be done, how it will be financed and when progress can reasonably be expected. Promises that disregard municipal responsibilities or available resources contribute to a cycle of expectation and disappointment. Parties should also account for the performance of their representatives where they have governed. The election campaign must provide an opportunity to assess records of leadership, rather than allowing accountability to disappear beneath slogans and political spectacle.
Voters, in turn, should scrutinise the individuals who seek to represent them. A councillor’s responsibilities include representing community concerns, exercising oversight and participating in decisions about municipal priorities and resources. These responsibilities require accessibility, preparation and a willingness to account. Party affiliation remains important in electoral politics, but it should not prevent citizens from asking whether candidates understand the communities they wish to serve. The quality of representation matters because an election cannot strengthen local democracy if elected representatives become distant from the people immediately after assuming office.
The period after the election will be equally important. Three priorities deserve particular attention. The first is the protection of municipal administrative competence. Political leadership has a legitimate responsibility to determine policy direction and oversee implementation. Municipal administration, however, requires suitably qualified personnel who can perform their duties consistently and lawfully. Appointments driven by patronage weaken institutions and make service delivery vulnerable to political contests. Municipal recovery requires professional administrations capable of maintaining institutional knowledge and implementing council decisions, including when political leadership changes.
The second priority is transparency that communities can use. Publishing lengthy reports fulfils only part of the responsibility to account. Residents should be able to understand how municipal money is spent, why projects are delayed and what is being done when commitments are missed. Performance information must be accessible and connected to concerns people recognise in their neighbourhoods. Councils should explain decisions openly and ensure that failures attract appropriate consequences. Accountability becomes meaningful when communities can trace the relationship between a promise, the resources allocated to it and the outcome.
The third priority is meaningful public participation between elections. Voting provides the authority to govern, but it does not exhaust the democratic role of citizens. Ward committees, public meetings and consultations on municipal plans and budgets must offer communities a genuine opportunity to influence decisions. Participation loses credibility when residents are invited to meetings after priorities have effectively been settled. Municipalities must also explain how public submissions have informed their decisions. Young people, women, persons with disabilities and residents of marginalised communities must have practical opportunities to participate.
Where elections produce councils without an outright majority, coalition arrangements must be assessed against these same principles. Negotiations should produce clear commitments on governance, service delivery and accountability. Communities have a legitimate interest in knowing what coalition partners have agreed to and how disagreements will be managed. Political competition is part of democracy, but repeated struggles over positions can consume the attention needed to govern. Whatever the composition of a council, its responsibility to residents remains. Municipal institutions must continue functioning while parties negotiate their political relationships.
Ultimately, the credibility of these elections will depend on more than the announcement of results. It will also depend on what follows: the conduct of councillors, the competence of administrations and the space available for communities to hold power accountable. South Africans should vote with an understanding that local government shapes both their immediate living conditions and the future of democratic governance. For the resident waiting for water or a response to an overflowing sewer, democracy must carry meaning beyond election day. The task before political parties, elected representatives and citizens is to ensure that it does.
