Staff Reporter
Eskom’s process to cut electricity to parts of Johannesburg remains active despite public reports suggesting the City of Johannesburg’s debt dispute with the utility had been resolved, the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) said.
OUTA said no tangible evidence had been provided that a settlement had been reached between Eskom and the city, and warned that the public participation process under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) had been undermined by perceptions that the matter had been settled.
Eskom issued notice in May that it intended to reduce, interrupt or terminate electricity supply to certain bulk supply points in Johannesburg because the city and City Power owed it more than R5.2 billion in arrears, excluding a further current account payment due in June.
The threat triggered concern over the possible impact on South Africa’s biggest city and economic hub, before Electricity Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa, Johannesburg Mayor Dada Morero, Eskom and City Power held talks aimed at avoiding a widespread interruption.
Subsequent reports described an intervention plan under which City Power’s electricity revenue would be ring-fenced, technical support would be provided and the parties would continue working under an existing agreement.
OUTA said the problem was that no agreement had been made public and Eskom’s interruption process had not been withdrawn.
The organisation said the PAJA process aimed at enabling electricity supply interruptions remained active, Eskom intended to proceed despite widespread public perceptions that the matter had been resolved, Eskom was preparing to execute on court judgments against the city, and Eskom had already disconnected certain streetlights due to non-payment.
OUTA said the deadline for public submissions remained June 17, while Eskom was expected to communicate its final decision before June 24.
Eskom’s plans, according to OUTA, aim to cut electricity to certain bulk supply points in Johannesburg by July 8.
OUTA said it had instructed its attorneys to advise on the best legal remedies to address the Eskom and City of Johannesburg electricity dispute “with the aim of ensuring the lights stay on”.
“Whilst the public engagement process continues, we believe that this may require legal intervention to ensure residents and business interests are protected and that the customers of CoJ don’t become collateral damage,” said Advocate Stefanie Fick, Executive Director of the Accountability Division at OUTA.
According to Julius Kleynhans, Executive Manager at OUTA, Johannesburg residents and businesses were led to believe that the city’s debt dispute with Eskom had been resolved after public announcements suggested that an agreement had been reached.
“OUTA encourages business and residents to comment and raise their objections in Eskom’s public engagement process to ensure their voices are heard before the 17 June 2026 deadline date.”
Eskom, through its notice of intent to cut power to the city, allowed businesses and residents to raise concerns and comment on its intention to interrupt supply because of the city’s failure to pay Eskom for the electricity it supplies.
OUTA said that process had now been weakened because many residents, businesses and organisations would reasonably have concluded that there was no longer any need to make submissions after reports emerged that Eskom and the city had reached an agreement.
“A public participation process can only be meaningful if people have accurate information,” says Kleynhans.
“Residents are already experiencing the consequences of this dispute,” says Kleynhans.
“Darkened streets raise concerns around public safety, security, and mobility. These are not abstract financial disagreements taking place in boardrooms. They are decisions with real-world consequences for people who depend on functioning public infrastructure every day.”
OUTA said paying residents and businesses should not be punished for governance and financial failures within the City of Johannesburg and City Power.
“The debt crisis was not created by ordinary residents who pay their accounts every month,” says Kleynhans.
“Those responsible for managing electricity revenues and ensuring Eskom is paid must be held accountable, but compliant consumers cannot continue to carry the consequences of government failures.”
Kleynhans said Johannesburg’s position as South Africa’s economic hub meant any interruption of electricity supply would have consequences beyond individual consumers, affecting economic activity, employment, public safety, healthcare facilities, schools, telecommunications infrastructure, water services and investor confidence.
OUTA has asked Eskom to publicly clarify the status of negotiations with the city, inform stakeholders that the notice of intention to cut power continues, extend the public comment deadline by 30 days, and share the agreement reached between Eskom and the City of Johannesburg.
“Cutting electricity to CoJ poses a significant public interest. The people and business should be granted sufficient opportunity to exercise their rights, and such a process must be fair and reasonable,” Kleynhans added.
Residents, businesses and civil society organisations have been encouraged to make submissions before the June 17 deadline if they want their concerns formally considered as part of Eskom’s decision-making process.
Submissions can be sent to Anna Tsukudu, Key Accounts Manager for Customer Services, at cpsubmissions@eskom.co.za, using the reference number CoJ / CP.
INSIDE POLITICS
