With only three days before the first official Macufe 2022 event is supposed to take place, Judge Phillip Loubser says the case is too complex for him to make a judgement immediately after hearing all sides’ arguments, therefore, he could not hand down judgment on Monday 26 September 2022 or on Tuesday 27 September 2022.

He said what he wanted to understand throughout the hearing was why the applicant, Mosa Likobo, director of DS Consortium, waited until the commencement of Macufe to launch an urgent application. He explains that in Likobo’s affidavit, he said he found out on 9 September 2022 that Macufe events will be happening at only one terrain, namely the Old Grey Sports Club, and asked why he did not apply at that time?

Loubser also asked, should his judgment favour the applicant, what will it mean for Macufe 2022 - does it mean there won’t be a Macufe for the third year running?

ALSO READ: Fate of #Macufe 2022 to be determined

Joubert Zietsman, the attorney who appeared on behalf of DS Consortium, argued that should judgment favour his client, it won’t necessarily mean that there “won’t be a Macufe 2022”.

“All we want is for things to be done lawfully.”

When arguing the merits of the application, the specifications of the tender that were changed were put in the spotlight. He argues that the current Macufe events and the Soulful to Soulful events, the brainchild of the successful Macufe bidder C-Squared, are a mirror of each other.

"It is unfair to other bidders that the specifications of the tender were changed without any notifications," he adds.

He also argues that the Free State Department of Sports, Arts, Culture and Recreation has failed to submit an appointment letter showing that C-Squared has been appointed as the service provider.

In addition to no appointment letter, there isn’t any signed agreement between the department and C-Squared. "Millions have already been spent towards Macufe 2022, however, there isn’t any agreement signed between the two parties," he adds.

He also says according to his and his client’s knowledge, Macufe was to commence on 2 October with a gospel event and the soccer match held on 25 September 2022 was to be held on 9 October 2022, this is according to the specifications on the tender invitation; therefore, they believed they still had time to appeal.

ALSO READ - #Macufe: Court bid launched against Free State Arts and Culture

Arguing on behalf of the department was Lungile Bomela - who states that the specifications of the tender were not changed. C-Squared changed venues of the events after he was announced as the successful bidder, and that is allowed.

He also referred to Likobo's affidavit, which stated that he wrote to the MEC responsible for Sports, Arts, Culture, and Recreation, Limakatso Mahasa, numerous times to inquire as to who received the tender, but that the body that awards tenders does not have records of the letters in question because Mahasa is not a member of that body.

ALSO READ: C-Squared wins R16,8 million bid to organise #Macufe

The attorney representing C-Squared, Jerry Merabe, told the court that the Soulful to Soulful events in question were organised when it was not clear whether Macufe would go on or not—before the department released the tender invitation for service providers. 

He adds that C-Squared has an agreement with the department that it will no longer go on with the Soulful to Soulful events, and will dedicate its time and efforts to making Macufe a success. 

Coming to the issue of changed venues, he says his client changed most of Macufe's event venues to the Old Greys Club because the stated venues on the tender specifications were no longer available for hire. The two parties, C-Squared and the department, agreed that the venues could be changed.

Before Loubser adjourned the hearing for the day, Zietsman stated that this is the first time he has heard that venues were changed due to availability because, according to Likobo's affidavit, the venues were changed because they were unsuitable for the events.

Addressing the court, Loubser did not make mention that Macufe must not be held before he delivers his judgment, nor when he will be delivering his judgment, which raises the question, "Will Macufe continue as planned?"

OFM News