2006 Local Government Elections
Held on 1 March 2006. Results by municipal area, summed from the IEC's voting-district results. No boundary geometry is held for this election's areas, so its results are shown as tables.
Municipal PR ballot: results
Every voter's proportional representation ballot for their municipal council.
| Party or contestant (as listed) | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|
| AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS | 6 469 420 | 65,7% |
| DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE/DEMOKRATIESE ALLIANSIE | 1 608 154 | 16,3% |
| INKATHA FREEDOM PARTY | 744 486 | 7,6% |
| INDEPENDENT DEMOCRATS | 217 761 | 2,2% |
| UNITED DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT | 129 047 | 1,3% |
| AFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY | 128 990 | 1,3% |
| PAN AFRICANIST CONGRESS OF AZANIA | 109 816 | 1,1% |
| VRYHEIDSFRONT PLUS | 94 140 | 1,0% |
| UNITED CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY | 62 459 | 0,6% |
| MINORITY FRONT | 42 530 | 0,4% |
| NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION | 35 899 | 0,4% |
| UNITED INDEPENDENT FRONT | 31 018 | 0,3% |
| Others (81 together) | 178 379 | 1,8% |
Show all 93 parties and contestants
Key figures
- Valid votes
- 9 852 099
- Turnout
- 48,0%
- Votes cast
- 10 085 400
- Spoilt votes
- 233 301
- Registered voters
- 21 019 897
- Ballots
- 237
Compare with another local Government election
No map for this election
Boundary geometry for the areas of 2006 is not held. Areas change between elections, so these results are never drawn on today's boundaries; they are listed by area below.
North West: by municipal area
Municipal areas as the official results list them for this election
AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESSDEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE/DEMOKRATIESE ALLIANSIEINKATHA FREEDOM PARTYINDEPENDENT DEMOCRATSUNITED DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENTAFRICAN CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTYPAN AFRICANIST CONGRESS OF AZANIAVRYHEIDSFRONT PLUS
| Municipal area | Valid votes | Turnout | TRULY ALLIANCE | Most votes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ditsobotla [Lichtenburg] | 32 028 | 48,5% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 79,0% |
| Greater Taung [Reivilo] | 43 743 | 53,1% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 81,2% |
| Kagisano [Ganyesa] | 23 099 | 55,7% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 78,8% |
| Kgetlengrivier [Koster] | 9 335 | 52,2% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 75,6% |
| Lekwa-Teemane [Christiana] | 9 493 | 46,4% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 79,8% |
| Madibeng [Brits] | 79 105 | 44,4% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 82,9% |
| Mafikeng [Mafikeng] | 52 869 | 45,9% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 69,8% |
| Mamusa [Schweizer-Reneke] | 9 517 | 47,5% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 80,1% |
| Maquassi Hills [Wolmaransstad] | 17 103 | 52,7% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 81,0% |
| Matlosana [Klerksdorp] | 79 799 | 47,4% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 75,2% |
| Merafong City [Carletonville] | 21 980 | 25,2% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 65,1% |
| Molopo [Pomfret] | 2 088 | 46,1% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 77,2% |
| Moretele [Temba] | 40 385 | 48,1% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 88,8% |
| Moses Kotane [Mogwase] | 54 609 | 47,7% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 82,0% |
| Naledi [Vryburg] | 14 846 | 51,7% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 72,3% |
| Potchefstroom [Potchefstroom] | 36 078 | 46,5% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 65,7% |
| Ramotshere Moiloa [Zeerust] | 29 823 | 48,7% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 74,2% |
| Ratlou [Setlagole] | 23 536 | 56,3% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 84,7% |
| Rustenburg [Rustenburg] | 70 200 | 36,1% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 73,6% |
| Tswaing [Delareyville] | 24 914 | 54,2% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 80,4% |
| Ventersdorp [Ventersdorp] | 9 310 | 50,9% | – | AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 84,1% |
Coverage and comparability notes could not be loaded just now
This is a temporary problem reading the record, not a sign that nothing is recorded. Reload the page in a moment to try again.
About this record
Coverage, limitations, source issues and how the figures were checked
What the record holds
- Loaded: the proportional representation (PR) ballot of every municipality, as sums of the IEC's voting-district rows for each municipality (the number of voting districts summed is stored with each figure).
- Municipal areas are those of this election, as the IEC file lists them. No boundary geometry is held for them: results are shown as tables, never drawn on today's boundaries.
- Ward ballots: 3895 wards of the 2006 delimitation, each the sum of its voting districts in the IEC's results file. Ward candidates are not named in the file; every independent candidate in a ward is in one line, "INDEPENDENT", as published.
What it does not hold
- Not loaded in this milestone: ward ballots (each ward of this delimitation would need its own place record), the district council (DC 40%) ballots (the file does not name the district a municipality belongs to), and district-management-area ballots. Their voting-district rows are in the official file (SHA-256 recorded). Update, 9 October 2026: the ward ballots have since been loaded from the same file (notes below); the district council and district-management-area ballots are still not loaded.
- These are the 2006 wards. Ward codes were reissued at each delimitation, so a 2006 ward is not the 2021 ward with the same number and is not drawn on today's map.
Source issues
- 6 line(s) have a garbled registered-voters field next to a party name with an unquoted comma; the voting district's figure is taken from its other lines.
How it was read and checked
- Election date: Polling day as proclaimed in the Government Gazette. The IEC results files do not state the date and the proclamation is not yet among this election's captured documents.
Sources
The official files behind these results
| Document | Role | Retrieved | SHA-256 |
|---|---|---|---|
| IEC 2006 Local Government Elections — full results down to voting-district level (zipped CSV) | Results data | 8 October 2026 | 42785a46247f1bad… |
Turnout 48,0%