EFF takes Finance Minsiter to court to halt fuel levy increase

Estimated reading time: 6 minute(s)

The EFF has taken their rejection of the fuel levy increase by the Finance Minister during his third budget to court saying the decision to increase fuel levy is just another way of taxing the poor in the expense of the rich and wealthy.

Minister Enoch Godongwana found himself at loggerheads with the general public and various political organizations in the first ever budget speech when he proposed a 2% VAT increase to fund public service citing poor cash flow and government having money.

Later on he went back to the drawing board after receiving a back lash and proposed 1% increase instead of the initial 2%. He suggested that the 1% be divided into two parts being 0.5% this year and the other half to follow in the following year.

That was also widely rejected and on the recent budget speech he opted for fuel levy increase among others by 16cents per litre on petrol and 15cents per litre on diesel, just for the government to find money to fund public service.

The EFF rejected this increase saying this is still the same as VAT increase because an increase in fuel cost means an increase in everything most importantly food and transportation which is used daily by the poor working class. They issued a statement Thursday morning ing saying they have filled urgent application in the Western Cape High Court to interdict the increase.

“We took this action after repeated efforts to caution the Minister and appeal to his conscience failed. We wrote to the Minister, urging him to consider the impact of this increase on the poor and working-class people of South Africa, especially during a time when cost-of-living is deepening. We also reminded him that, just like the VAT increase, raising the fuel levy without introducing a proper Money Bill is unlawful and undermines the parliamentary oversight.”

“Allowing such increase without Money Bill risks the entire national budget being declared invalid by the courts, potentially long after funds have already been spent. This would severely damage the constitutional standing of Parliament, undermine financial accountability, and cause serious consequences for service delivery and public confidence in government.”

The party called on the Parliament to act and called on the Minister to withdraw this decision.