Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorde Visser, Jaap
dc.contributor.authorSteytler, Nico
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-06T14:06:36Z
dc.date.available2018-09-06T14:06:36Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationDe Visser, J. & Steytler, N. (2016). Confronting the state of local government: the 2013 Constitution Court decisions. Constitutional Court Review, 2016: 1-23en_US
dc.identifier.issn2073-6215
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10566/4029
dc.description.abstractIn September 2014 the then Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Pravin Gordhan, divided municipalities into three groups: a third of the municipalities was carrying out their tasks adequately, a third was just managing, and the last third was ‘frankly dysfunctional’ because of poor governance, inadequate financial management, and poor accountability mechanisms.1 What this analysis starkly illustrates is that local government cannot be seen as a uniform institution, operating in the same manner, facing the same challenges. Most, but not all metropolitan municipalities are highly functional and the same applies to the so-called ‘secondary cities’. Then there are highly dysfunctional rural municipalities but also rural municipalities that perform well. Yet a uniform system of law applies to them all.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherJutaen_US
dc.rightsThis is the author-version of the published article
dc.subjectLocal governmenten_US
dc.subjectConstitutional courten_US
dc.subjectPoor governanceen_US
dc.titleConfronting the state of local government: the 2013 Constitutional Court decisionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.privacy.showsubmitterFALSE
dc.status.ispeerreviewedTRUE


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record