The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) in the Western Cape walked out of a mayoral civic dialogue held at the University of the Western Cape (UWC), saying organisers hid Cape Forum/AfriForum’s involvement and that material at the event advanced what the party described as a “racist, white supremacist and pro‑apartheid agenda.”
Party accuses organisers of concealment
EFF provincial chair Unathi Ntame said the party’s provincial treasurer, Aishah Cassiem, and other members left the Beyond the Ballot: Mayoral Civic and Dialogue because they would not legitimise the platform. The event was hosted by Cape Flats Stories and The Bridge SA Movement and held on Sunday at UWC. It aimed to tackle issues such as housing, land restitution, gender‑based violence, gang violence and spatial inequality.
“The organisers concealed AfriForum/Cape Forum's involvement. When confronted, they claimed a distinction that does not exist,”
Ntame also objected to Cape Forum material that he said promoted “growing federalism” and carried the slogan “plaas die Kaap se toekoms in Kaapse hande” (place the Cape's future in Cape hands), which had been printed on notepads distributed at the meeting.
Organisers say stationery oversight; reject broader charge
Tarryn‑Lee Bell, founder and director of The Bridge SA Movement, acknowledged and apologised for an oversight involving Cape Forum‑branded stationery. According to reporting on the event, she said organisers had offered an apology for that error but rejected the EFF’s broader claim that the gathering was being used to push a racist agenda.
Organisers said the dialogue’s intention was to create a civic space to discuss pressing civic challenges. They maintained that the event sought to include diverse civic actors and that the presence of particular materials did not reflect a hidden or coordinated political agenda.
Political context and the DA question
Ntame went further, saying the Democratic Alliance (DA) had maintained an association with groups that favour increased provincial powers. He argued that Cape independence organisations historically count many DA supporters and had pressed the party to back a referendum on independence because of its federalist and devolution stance.
Organisers and critics are now at odds over whether the stationery incident was a one‑off lapse or evidence of concealed influence. The EFF’s position frames the issue as part of a broader struggle over who sets the terms of civic debate in the Western Cape.
What was on the agenda?
- Housing shortages and delivery backlogs
- Land restitution and tenure security
- Gender‑based violence and support services
- Gang violence and community safety
- Spatial inequality and service access
Speakers and participants had intended to discuss these topics in breakout sessions and plenary debate. The EFF’s withdrawal reduced the range of political voices on the platform and left organisers facing questions about vetting and sponsorship transparency.
Local implications
The incident underlines tensions in Western Cape civic life where race, land and governance intersect. University forums are important venues for civic engagement in Cape Town, particularly on persistent problems such as spatial inequality and gang violence on the Cape Flats. When representation at such forums is contested, the potential for productive public debate diminishes.
For local activists, the immediate consequence is a fractured conversation. For political parties, the dispute feeds into ongoing narratives about allegiance and influence in the province — an area where questions about federalism and devolution are politically sensitive.
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Economic Freedom Fighters (Western Cape) | Withdrew from the dialogue; accused organisers of concealment |
| The Bridge SA Movement | Co‑host; apologised for stationery oversight |
| Cape Flats Stories | Co‑host of the dialogue |
| Cape Forum / AfriForum | Organisation whose branded material was distributed |
Neither the DA nor Cape Forum issued an immediate, full public response to the allegations in the reporting available. The organisers say they have taken steps to address the stationery error and emphasised the event’s civic aims.
In the short term, community groups and political parties face a choice: attempt to rebuild the civic platform with clearer sponsorship and participation rules, or allow the dispute to deepen distrust and reduce the spaces where shared public problems might be discussed. For residents confronting housing shortages, gang violence and service backlogs, the stakes are tangible: fewer spaces for cross‑sector solutions mean slower progress on issues that affect daily life in the city and province.
As the debate continues, transparency about event funding and clearer rules on the participation of politically aligned civic bodies will be central to restoring confidence in public dialogues at universities and in community spaces across the Western Cape.
