MIDDELBURG – Middelburg and Hendrina Residents Front (MHRF) councillor Cindy Mashabela is challenging her expulsion from the party after its own Disciplinary Committee (DC) recommended that her suspension be lifted and that she be reinstated with immediate effect.
Through her attorney, Mashabela has requested the minutes and attendance register of the meeting at which the decision to expel her was taken.
"I never received the minutes or documents I requested. I have therefore lodged an appeal with the chairperson, as provided for in the constitution," she said.
Mashabela, who also served as the party's treasurer, was expelled on 13 May 2026 after being suspended on 06 January 2026 over allegations of disrespectful behaviour and speech, including vulgar and derogatory statements allegedly made in the party's WhatsApp group.
Documents seen by Highveld Chronicle show that Mashabela received a letter dated 10 March 2026 instructing her to attend a disciplinary hearing on 18 March 2026.
According to the documents, two additional charges were later added, namely failing to comply with the conditions of her suspension and refusing to return organisational property, including a laptop, office keys and documents.
During the hearing, Mashabela objected to the process, arguing that it did not comply with the party's own constitution.
Referring to the MHRF Code of Conduct and its disciplinary procedures, she argued that the notice to appear before the disciplinary hearing should have been issued by the chairperson of the Disciplinary Committee.
"The letter of invitation was not from the DC chairperson. It came from the Executive Committee and was signed by the secretary," she said.
Mashabela argued that the procedural irregularity rendered the disciplinary hearing invalid.
The Disciplinary Committee subsequently recommended that her suspension be lifted with immediate effect and that she be reinstated to her position.
Despite that recommendation, Mashabela was expelled on 13 May 2026, prompting her to challenge the party's decision.
In a letter dated 05 June 2026, the MHRF instructed Mashabela to return all organisational equipment, documents, records and access credentials by 08 June 2026.
Mashabela said she had not returned the items because she was still awaiting documents relating to the decision to expel her.
"I requested the minutes and attendance register of the said meeting to confirm its legality, but to date I have not received them. I later informed them I would return the material during a members' meeting so that members could witness the handover, but to date no members' meeting has been called."
Correspondence between the attorneys representing Mashabela and the MHRF, seen by Highveld Chronicle, shows that the party maintains the Municipal Executive Committee (MEC) has the final authority in terms of Rule 12 and the party's constitution, despite the Disciplinary Committee's recommendation.
In a letter dated 01 June 2026, the MHRF stated that the Municipal Executive Committee had resolved not to reinstate Mashabela.
"After due consideration, the MEC resolved not to reinstate Mrs Mashabela, as her conduct constituted a failure to comply with her obligations under the constitution."
The party cited her alleged failure to return organisational property after her suspension and maintains that the disciplinary hearing complied with the constitution. It further alleged that Mashabela elected not to present her case because of concerns relating to legal representation.
Attempts to obtain comment from the MHRF were unsuccessful. A media enquiry sent on 02 July 2026 to chairperson Jomo Segage and secretary Thato Mathunyane initially received an indication that the party would respond.
Segage later declined to comment.
"The matter is sub judice. Until she files court papers as she promised, we will respond accordingly," he said.
Mashabela disputed that the matter is sub judice.
"There has so far only been communication between my lawyers and theirs. No court papers have been filed yet. An appeal has been lodged with the chairperson, who is required to respond within 21 days, as stipulated in the constitution."
To clarify the meaning of the legal principle, Highveld Chronicle approached attorney JB Sibanyoni.
Sibanyoni explained that a matter only becomes sub judice once it has been formally filed in court and is awaiting determination by a judge or magistrate.
"Until that point, even if lawyers are communicating, the matter is not yet sub judice. The rule is meant to prevent public discussion that could interfere with or prejudice ongoing court proceedings."
