Judge halts e-tolls
Cosatu, DA welcome ruling, which calls for full judicial review
THE fight against e-tolling on Gauteng’s highways is not yet over, but opponents of the project have won round one.
In the Pretoria High Court yesterday, Judge Bill Prinsloo ruled that the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) could not levy e-tolls until a full judicial review of the project could be heard in court.
This means that the fight will continue over the next few months.
Opposition parties and Cosatu boss Zwelinzima Vavi welcomed the ruling.
The Department of Transport said it had noted the judgment, was studying the ruling and would “decide on the next course of action”.
Judge Prinsloo said that while he realised Sanral would suffer financial losses, the public would also suffer hardship if e-tolling went ahead.
“I make the following order… the first respondent (Sanral) is interdicted and restrained from levying and collecting tolls,” he said.
On Twitter, Vavi said: “There is no replacement to principle and truth – congratulations!!!”
He later tweeted: “Biggest lesson is that people united will never be defeated. Well done for uniting irrespective of other usual differences.”
DA transport spokesman Neil Campbell said the ruling “at least opens the door for stopping this inexplicably costly toll collection system. We trust that during the review process all the financial facts will come to light and we will learn who stood to make money out of this project.”
Afriforum chief executive Kallie Kriel urged motorists not to register for e-tolls until the full legal process had been completed, saying the organisation had not registered any of its vehicles.
“If sufficient motorists were to refuse to register in protest, it would add pressure to the legal actions on Sanral to reconsider the cost effectiveness of the e-toll system as a collection mechanism,” he said.
During the court case this week, the government painted a bleak picture of the potential damage a suspension of the e-tolling could cause to the country’s reputation.
In the “doomsday scenario”, Judge Prinsloo was told how it was imperative that the toll project begin tomorrow, to enable Sanral to pay the monthly R220 million instalment it owed on the R20 billion loan it took to improve Gauteng roads.
However, within hours of arguments by three separate legal teams, the government had done the very thing its lawyers had said was impossible: postponed the implementation of the e-toll project by a month.
On Friday, the National Treasury would not explain the apparent disconnect between what was said in court in the case involving the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance, and the decision taken in a highlevel meeting between the ANC and Cosatu.
This month the Treasury joined the e-tolling fray in a panic over the possible effects of any delay in the implementation.
In an affidavit before the court, Treasury deputy director-general Andrew Donaldson said the government was afraid that it would have to immediately pay the full R19bn borrowed by Sanral.
“The consequence for South Africa in the event could be very serious.
“The credit rating of Sanral in the money markets in the first instance will be severely affected, since it raises money by issuing bonds,” Donaldson said.
Asked on Friday whether the Treasury was concerned about the month-long delay caused by the Cosatu meeting, Donaldson would not comment in detail.
“A month is not a big deal. The court proceeding is not just about a month. We are not commenting on Treasury’s position until after the decision,” he said.
Spokesman Jabulani Sikhakhane said the Treasury would comment “only after we have studied the judgment”.
During the court case, Jeremy Gauntlett SC, arguing for the government, said: “The government would meet it (the debt) but the point is, at what cost?
“It is not one month’s instalment. It’s the R20bn that immediately accrues.
“The critical thing is that the government will be faced with an unbudgeted extra, capital debt. It will have to be addressed.”
Also at odds with the government’s arguments in court was the ANC’S undertaking to investigate other payment methods.
Advocate David Unterhalter SC, appearing for Sanral, argued against an alternative funding method, saying that looking at the original estimates for e-toll fees, “everyone is getting a bargain today”.
Unterhalter said the alliance’s view that toll collection fees were likely to be as expensive as the road project itself was incorrect.
“There can be no claim of irrationality” in the decision to use e-tolling, he said.
Among the documents submitted by Sanral and the Transport Department to prove their case was a 2011 report by the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project steering committee, which argued against other finance methods such as a fuel levy.
The committee’s report said the Treasury was not in favour of a fuel levy or an increase in licensing fees.
The current fuel levy would have to be “substantially increased” to pay for the Gauteng project and could be as much as R1.53 per litre more.
The fuel levy will have to increase by 92c per litre to address the R149bn backlog on road maintenance, and an addition 25c will be required for the Gauteng freeway project.
To cover the R7.16bn shortfall which already exists for road infrastructure, the government would add another 36c, bringing the total figure to R1.53.
The committee also said a provincial fuel levy would be “administratively burdensome” and unfair because motorists who didn’t use the toll roads would still be charged.
People could also avoid using the additional tax by filling up in other provinces.