The KGG’s says its submission of objections to the name change from Grahamstown to Makhanda has been returned “unclaimed” by the Post Office.
In a statement on Saturday 3 November, the Keep Grahamstown Grahamstown Campaign said its submission of over 1000 pages on behalf of approximately 10 000 individual objectors had been despatched to the office of the Minister before the close of the 30 day period for the submission of objections after the proposed name change was gazetted on 29 June 2018.
“Proof of despatch was provided to the Minister’s personal secretary, Ms Leonah Smith, together with a copy of the tracking details,” said campaign organisers Jock McConnachie and Sigidla Ndumo in a jointly signed statement.
The KGG had also repeatedly written to the office of the Minister with the latest tracking information as obtained from the Post Office website requesting confirmation that the item had been collected.
“No reply was received from the office of the Minister nor did the KGG receive an acknowledgement of receipt of its objection as submitted both via the post and electronically,” said McConnachie and Ndumo.
“All the KGG received was a reply that objections would be dealt with ‘in accordance with the requirements of the applicable Act’.”
Those objectors who did receive acknowledgements of receipt of their objections had been told their objections had been referred for comment by the South African Geographic Names Council (SAGNC), the KGG said.
“Those objectors who have received reasons for the Minister’s “final decision” have also been referred to the reasons contained in a letter from the Chairperson of the SAGNC, Mr Johnny Mohlala dated 14.9.18.”
Mohlala’s letter states that objections to the proposed name change were the same as those submitted to the SAGNC previously and referred to “some of the issues” already considered by it and rejected.
“The letter therefore advised the Minister that the objections should be rejected for the same reason without explaining the reasons,” the KGG said.
“The KGG only belatedly received a similar response to its objection from the Minister but the question now arises how the Minister could consider the KGG’s objection if it was never collected?
“We are convinced that the Minister did not himself apply his mind to the objections as the law requires and that his “final decision” was based on the inadequate reasons provided by the SAGNC,” the Campaign said.
“The process leading up to the Minister’s ‘final decision’ and the ‘final decision’ itself was riddled with irregularities and the KGG is confident that the application to set aside the decision will succeed. “The view of the KGG is that Grahamstown is still Grahamstown until a court of law declares it otherwise.”
The Minister had not yet responded to a request for confirmation and comment by Grocott’s Mail at the time of publishing.
