Johannesburg — RECORDS of Gauteng legislature local government portfolio committee meetings held before the passing of the Constitution Twelfth Amendment Bill in 2005 show that the committee changed its position on Khutsong being transferred to North West - just a week after deciding to keep it in Gauteng.

The legislature's turnabout came to light following the submission to the court of documents containing minutes and transcripts of committee meetings held on November 29 and December 5 .

Chief Justice Pius Langa last month requested the legislature to file the record of proceedings relating to the consideration and the conferral of the negotiating mandate, and the final voting mandate of the legislature relating to the bill.

Municipalities that straddled two provinces were affected by the amendment.

The change of mandate arose from concern that if Gauteng vetoed the bill, the Cross-Boundary Municipalities Laws Repeal Bill would have to be withdrawn from Parliament and local government elections held in March 2006 would be conducted within the municipal configuration with cross-border municipalities.

Merafong was a cross-border municipality, with some parts in Gauteng and others in North West.

Residents of Khutsong said in their application to the court heard in September last year that they had called for the verbatim record of the legislature's debate when the final mandate was decided on -- without success.

"What happened here defeated the whole purpose of a second chamber in Parliament," they said in court papers. "The (legislature) failed to protect the specific interest of the people of Gauteng. Such a failure... is irrational and an abandonment of duty."

The court reserved judgment in September .

The transcript of the committee meeting of November 29 shows it recommended that the bill provide for the inclusion of the municipal area of Merafong into the municipal area of West Rand in Gauteng.

At the subsequent committee meeting of December 5 on the adoption of final voting on the bill, it changed its position.

Committee chairwoman Refilwe Letwaba said the committee's November 29 negotiating mandate signalled qualified support for the bill.

" Provinces can adopt or reject the constitution bill only in terms of section 74(8) of the constitution," she told the December 5 meeting.

"The section stated that if a bill concerned only a specific province, the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) may not pass the bill or the relevant part unless it had been approved by the legislature of the province concerned."

She proposed that the committee's final mandate be that the legislature confer authority on the head of its delegation of the NCOP to vote for the bill.

Letwaba told committee members it was important they took a principled decision as to whether their position outweighed the national interestor not.

However, Democratic Alliance provincial MP Paul Willemburg asked why the committee changed its mind. "I was under the impression that prior to the visit to Merafong the position to be taken would be what the people wanted."

In her reply, Letwaba said it was clear people in Merafong did not want to be included in North West.

"However, I read the constitution about what the implications are and for me the implications are what inform the committee -- nothing else -- on taking a different position from the position we took in the negotiating mandate."

In a legislature debate on December 6, Letwaba said the committee reviewed its initial position because it was important to understand what the implications would be if Gauteng did not support the amendment to the constitution.

"If the veto of the whole Constitution Bill as it relates to cross-boundary municipalities, the Cross-Boundary Municipalities Laws Repeal Bill will have to be withdrawn from Parliament.

"Local government elections would be conducted within the municipal configuration with cross- border municipalities as is."