The Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) on Thursday encouraged road users of the soon-to-be-tolled highways in Gauteng to wait and see the outcome of the North Gauteng High Court's review in November.

This followed the Constitutional Court's (Concourt's) decision to set aside the interim interdict preventing the South African National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) from tolling the highways built under the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP).

The Concourt threw out the temporary interdict on the basis that the High Court, which granted Outa the interdict in April, failed to "consider or to give effect to the constitutional imperative of separation of powers".

This now enabled Sanral to start collecting revenue through the tolling of some of Gauteng's highways and attempt to reduce the R21-billion debt incurred during the road upgrades.

Outa chairperson Wayne Duvenage said that he did not believe that the decision was in the interest of the public and was concerned that the voices of the citizens were sacrificed because of a legal technicality.

He also voiced concern that the court had set a precedent, constraining broad-based citizen groups, such as Outa, from effectively challenging major decisions made by government, particularly those that lacked the necessary preparation, rationality and appropriate processes.

Duvenage pointed out that the e-tolling system proposed by Sanral was administratively cumbersome and that a number of issues of the system, and their solutions, were unclear and had to be finalised before the agency could start tolling, even temporarily.

However, Sanral said at the interdict appeal in August that it could have the system live within two weeks.

Duvenage claimed that Sanral said on Thursday that the system would go live within four weeks of the successful appeal.

The final terms and conditions needed to be tabled, as well as the tariff structure. Sanral also needed to, besides others, outline and clarify exemptions and enforcement methods. Security and protection in the case of fraud, for instance, also needed to be publicly outlined.

Duvenage believed that, in light of this, amongst others, Sanral could take up to a month to implement tolling, and by then the review of the entire system would be under way at the North Gauteng High Court.

He was also confident that Outa held a strong case against Sanral and the outcome of the interdict appeal did not affect the review scheduled for November.

The Department of Transport (DoT) welcomed the Concourt ruling and said it would study the judgement before making an announcement on the way forward.

It said in a statement that the ruling proved that the North Gauteng High Court had erred in judgement when granting the initial interdict.

Further, the DoT remained convinced that the user-pay principle for the GFIP was “appropriate”, as part of South Africa’s road infrastructure investment.

South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Sacci) CEO Neren Rau acknowledged the decision by the Concourt, but said that the ruling did not mean that negotiations between Sanral and the business community would end suddenly.

He said Sacci remained concerned about the impact of e-tolls on the cost of doing business and the proportion of the revenue that would go toward a seemingly ineffectual collection method.

“The quality of a roadway that is relatively expensive is also of concern; the highways included in the GFIP continue to experience a high incidence of traffic deadlock. Before a road user is charged to use the GFIP, the facilities must be in place to ensure that users receive a full-value service. The GFIP must, therefore, be economically feasible so that the benefits of using the tolled road exceed the costs,” Rau said.

Democratic Alliance (DA) Gauteng caucus leader Jack Bloom said that Sanral would find it difficult to implement the e-toll collection system on the back of widespread public opposition.

Civil rights organisation AfriForum CEO Kallie Kriel has called on motorists not to register for e-tolling. “The court’s finding does not mean the end of the e-tolling fight. The fight is only starting,” he said.

Kriel noted that outstanding notices about rates and waivers still had to be heard and that outstanding notices about rates and waivers still had to appear in the government gazette before e-tolling could be implemented.

The Automobile Association, which said it was disappointed with the Concourt ruling, also urged its members not to register for e-tags. “This ruling shows little consideration for the serious impact that tolling will have on the already financially stretched consumer and the added cost to business in the province,” head of public affairs Gary Ronald said.

The Justice Project South Africa, which reacted with “sincere regret and disappointment”, said that the ruling set a negative precedent, “showing that citizens who are stonewalled by government may not turn to the courts for relief, while those who resort to violence get what they want”, referring to the recent strike action and unrest at platinum producer Lonmin’s Marikana mine.

The temporary interdict was brought against Sanral by Outa and handed down by North Gauteng High Court Judge Bill Prinsloo in April.

In August, the National Treasury and Sanral took the matter to the Concourt to have the interdict overturned, as Sanral was falling into the red financially while Outa challenged the funding model and the costs relating to the toll collection for the GFIP.