Constitutional Review Committee: Study Tour Report to Venice and Strasbourg

Meeting report

The Chairperson noted that the Committee could not approve any of the reports on the agenda as there not sufficient Members to constitute a quorum. However the Committee would continue with the meeting and discuss some of the issues.

Report on the Constitutional Review Committee on a Study Tour to Venice and Strasbourg
Dr M Oriani-Ambrosini (IFP) welcomed the draft report. He insisted that the main objectives of the Study Tour were not adequately captured in the report. He argued that the aim of the tour was, in part, to investigate South Africa’s acceptance and membership to the Venice Commission. Secondly, it was to impress on the Venice Commission the uniqueness of South Africa in terms of Section 45(1) (c) of the Constitution. Moreover, he maintained that the aim was to source the Venice Commission’s opinion on what methodology the Joint Constitutional Review Committee could adopt in pursuing its mandate?

Ms B Mncube (ANC) argued that, in restructuring the report, the Findings needed to be in line with the Terms of Reference.

Mr A Ainslie moved that the majority party (ANC) would not be in a hurry to canvass for membership at the Venice Commission, because the Commission’s primary focus was on European issues. He felt that as part of the Lessons Learnt, the experience ought to be used to create a similar Commission for Africa.

Dr Oriani-Ambrosini replied that the focus of the Venice Commission was on non-democratic states. South Africa’s membership, there, could be used to assist African countries. He urged the Committee to take advantage of the special arrangement the Venice Commission was willing to extend to South Africa.

The Chairperson ruled that, after hearing submissions from Mr Koornhof, Mr N Schmidt and Mr Swart it was immutable that the report should indicate that the Venice Commission had extended a special invitation for South Africa to be a member thereto. He argued that extensive consultation with the relevant authorities on this matter was imperative.

Report on 2010 Public Submissions
The report was noted and it was agreed that it will be adopted, with amendments, at the Committee’s next meeting.

Report of Activities of the Constitutional Review Committee Jan-Nov 2010
The report was noted and it was agreed that it will be adopted at the Committee’s next meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.