African National Congress (ANC) Youth League KwaZulu-Natal Chairperson Kwazi Mshengu believes that Tuesday’s high court ruling should be challenged.

In an immediate reaction to the ruling announced by Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Jerome Mnguni, who ruled that the 2015 KwaZulu-Natal ANC elective conference was unlawful, Mshengu said the decision should be appealed.

“We will definitely appeal the outcome, but further details on the matter will be communicated,” said Mshengu.

The provincial youth league leadership has consistently expressed its support for the current Provincial Executive Committee which is led by chairperson Sihle Zikalala who toppled Senzo Mchunu in the controversial 2015 conference.

On Wednesday, at the ANC KZN’s headquarters in Durban, both the Youth League and Women’s League were set to address the media on the court decision.

The court ruled that the ANC’s 2015 provincial conference and the results of the conference were unlawful.  The court’s findings, which had been deliberated by judges Balton, Chetty, Koen, and Mnguni, noted among other things that:

– that party procedures in electing branches and regions ahead of the elective conference had not been followed.

– branches  that had successfully challenged their disqualification had not been allowed to participate in the conference

The court also ordered the ANC to pay half of the costs of the applicants, including the costs of two counsel.

The ANC KZN leadership has 15 days to lodge an appeal against the ruling.

Meanwhile, the joyful scenes outside the court continued until midday, almost three hours after the court judgement, before crowds finally dispersed.

In the 2015 conference, then ANC chairperson Mchunu, was defeated by then provincial secretary Zikalala and it paved the way for Mchunu’s subsequent removal as KZN Premier in 2016. Some MECs were also removed along with Mchunu in what was seen as purge.

Shortly after the judgement, ANC national spokesperson Zizi Kodwa said the ruling party had noted the ruling and that it would “study the judgment as delivered and interact with our structures on the political ramifications of the decision prior to placing the matter before the appropriate political platform for a decision on the way forward”.