Key Takeaways
- Yellow stickers bearing “#MaryMustGo” and “Farrarmere, Time To Fire Mary Goby” appeared on road‑sign posts in Benoni’s Farrarmere suburb, targeting Ward 28 councillor Mary Goby.
- Defacing road traffic signs is illegal under the National Road Traffic Act and Ekurhuleni’s municipal by‑laws, punishable by fines up to R2 000, up to six months’ imprisonment, or both, plus recovery of repair costs.
- Councillor Goby condemned the vandalism, stressing that political competition must remain lawful and that public infrastructure is not a campaign billboard.
- She urged residents with CCTV, dash‑cam, smartphone or other footage to come forward so authorities can investigate and identify the perpetrators.
- Goby appealed to fellow candidates to campaign vigorously but respectfully, focusing on policy differences rather than destructive tactics.
- The incident highlights the financial strain on the metro, risks to public trust, and the importance of resolving electoral contests through debate and the ballot box, not through vandalism.
Incident Overview and Sticker Campaign
In Benoni’s Farrarmere suburb, residents woke up on Tuesday to find a series of yellow stickers affixed to road‑sign posts at several key intersections. The notices bore the slogans “#MaryMustGo” and “Farrarmere, Time To Fire Mary Goby”, directly targeting Ward 28 councillor Mary Goby. Stop signs were among the infrastructure defaced, turning routine traffic controls into impromptu political billboards. Goby noted that this was not the first time she had been subjected to such tactics, describing it as the second occasion her opponents had resorted to vandalising public signage to sway voter opinion. The appearance of the stickers coincided with the final weeks of campaigning ahead of the local government elections, signalling a shift from traditional canvassing to a more confrontational street‑level approach.
Legal Framework Governing Road Sign Defacement
South African law treats the defacement of road traffic signs as a criminal offence. The National Road Traffic Act explicitly prohibits the wilful or negligent damaging of any road traffic sign, as well as unauthorised alterations to its position, inscription, lettering, colour or markings. Ekurhuleni’s municipal by‑laws reinforce this prohibition, stating that anyone who removes, mutilates, obscures, damages or otherwise interferes with a municipal traffic sign may be prosecuted. Upon conviction, offenders can face a fine of up to R2 000, imprisonment of up to six months in default of payment, or both, and the metro is entitled to recover the costs of repairing or replacing the damaged infrastructure. These legal provisions underscore that political expression, however fervent, does not grant a licence to vandalise public property.
Councillor Mary Goby’s Response
Councillor Mary Goby condemned the act, emphasising that while vigorous political competition is a cornerstone of democracy, it must remain within the bounds of the law. She stated that opponents are free to criticise her record, challenge her policies and urge voters to consider alternatives, but they do not possess the right to damage public infrastructure in order to make a point. Goby argued that defacing road signs not only breaks legal statutes but also imposes unnecessary financial strain on a metro that already struggles with limited resources for maintenance and repair. She called the vandalism an affront to the very community the perpetrators claim to want to serve, noting that legitimate debate should occur through political discourse and the ballot box, not through illicit street‑level sabotage.
Call for Public Assistance and Evidence
Recognising that identifying the perpetrators requires evidence, Goby urged residents who may have captured the act on CCTV, security cameras, dash‑cams, smartphones or any other recording device to come forward with their footage, photographs or any relevant information. She stressed that the matter would be handed over to the appropriate law‑enforcement authorities, who would conduct a thorough investigation and determine responsibility based on factual evidence rather than speculation. By appealing to the public for assistance, Goby hoped to deter future acts of vandalism and reinforce the message that the community itself plays a vital role in safeguarding municipal assets. She reiterated that no individual should be presumed guilty without due process, and that any penalties would be applied only after a lawful adjudication.
Appeal to Fellow Candidates
Goby also directed a pointed appeal to her fellow candidates contesting Ward 28, urging them to campaign vigorously while respecting the legal and ethical boundaries that govern public space. She acknowledged that robust competition is healthy for democracy, but insisted that candidates must refrain from using municipal infrastructure as impromptu advertising boards. ‘Campaign as hard as you like. Challenge me. Critique me. Tell residents why you think they should replace me,’ she said, ‘but please respect the law. Our street signs and municipal infrastructure are public property, not campaign billboards.’ This appeal sought to set a tone of fair play, encouraging political rivals to focus on policy differences and service delivery records rather than resorting to destructive tactics that undermine public trust and increase municipal expenses.
Political Context and Election Timing
The appearance of the stickers occurred with less than a month remaining before the local government elections, a period when campaigning typically intensifies as parties and independents vie for voter support. In Ekurhuleni’s Ward 28, the contest has been marked by a noticeable escalation from traditional door‑to‑door canvassing and public meetings to more confrontational street‑level tactics. Goby noted that this was the second occasion she had been targeted by political opponents employing similar vandalism, suggesting a pattern of negative campaigning that seeks to bypass legitimate debate. The timing raises concerns that some actors may be attempting to influence voter perception through fear or intimidation rather than through policy proposals, potentially eroding the integrity of the electoral process.
Implications for Municipal Infrastructure
Beyond the immediate legal ramifications, the vandalism of road signs imposes tangible costs on Ekurhuleni’s already strained budget. Each defaced sign must be inspected, cleaned, repaired or replaced, diverting funds that could otherwise be allocated to essential services such as water sanitation, road maintenance or community programmes. The metro’s police services by‑laws allow it to recover repair expenses from those found guilty, but the process of identification, prosecution and restitution can be lengthy and uncertain. Frequent incidents of this nature also risk eroding public confidence in local government’s ability to maintain basic infrastructure, potentially discouraging investment and complicating service delivery efforts across the ward.
Conclusion and Outlook
In summary, the episode involving the ‘#MaryMustGo’ stickers serves as a stark reminder that political competition, while essential to a vibrant democracy, must be exercised responsibly and within the confines of the law. Councillor Mary Goby’s steadfast defence of legal norms, her call for community‑sourced evidence, and her appeal to fellow candidates to keep campaigning respectful highlight a broader principle: public infrastructure belongs to all citizens and should not be weaponised for partisan gain. As the elections approach, the hope is that voters will judge candidates on their records and visions at the ballot box, leaving the streets free of vandalism and the metro able to focus its limited resources on delivering the services residents deserve.