Criminal Matters Amendment Bill[B20-15]; Defence Laws and Repeal Amendment Bill [B7-15]; Judicial Matters Amendment Bill [B2-15]: adoption, in presence of Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Criminal Matters Amendment Bill, Defence Laws and Repeal Amendment Bill and Judicial Matters Amendment Bill: Deliberations and Adoption
Mr M Mohapi (ANC, Free State), asked if all Members of the Committee had been informed of the meeting.

The Chairperson said that the Committee Secretaries had informed all members.

He tabled the latest version of the Criminal Matters Amendment Bill. He said the public participation processes on this Bill had been carried out, and COSATU had submitted a written submission. The meeting had to decide if an oral submission was also required.

Mr Mohapi said he needed clarity from the Parliamentary Legal Advisor on whether there was a need to hold a public hearing.

Adv Anthea Gordon, Parliamentary Legal Advisor, said there was no absolute requirement to have a public hearing, since it was only required that Parliament should facilitate public input in any form. If the Committee felt that there was a need to call COSATU, then that was the Committee’s prerogative, but a written submission was accepted as a form of facilitation. She said advertisements had been placed inviting submissions. COSATU had provided a written submission, so the Members had to consider COSATU’s submission and if they felt that an oral submission was necessary then they had the right to call for this.

Mr M Mhlanga (ANC, Mpumalanga) said he felt that the legal advisor had not briefed the Committee properly and suggested that an oral presentation be called for. It was not just COSATU but also the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) that were affected.

Mr Mohapi asked who had sanctioned that the hearings be advertised through the media.

Ms Gordon said that it was not a Parliamentary Legal Services decision.

Mr Mohapi said that public participation had to be ensured and Members were concerned about the procedure which was followed in promoting public participation.

Mr J Mthethwa (ANC, KwaZulu-Natal) felt that there was a need to call public hearings because members were clearly concerned about the procedure.

The Chairperson said that was the point, and the Committee was sitting to decide whether to have public participation in the form of hearings.

Ms G Manopole (ANC, Northern Cape) took issue with the tone in which Adv Gordon had responded to Mr Mohapi’s questions and requested that another legal advisor be present as she had lost confidence in Adv Gordon.

Mr Mthethwa called for an adjournment of the meeting to discuss the matter and the meeting was adjourned. During the course of the adjournment, Mr John Jeffery, Deputy Minister of Justice, arrived and joined the caucus.

Upon resumption of the meeting Mr Mthethwa stated that the meeting had not taken a decision not to have Adv Gordon advocate present.

Mr Mohapi said he wanted clarity on section 75 bills and whether there was a need to have public hearings.

Mr Jeffery said the issue of the extent of public participation for section 75 bills had not been resolved by the courts. There were not public hearings held as a matter of course, but there were public hearings in exceptional cases – such as with the Protection of State Information Bill. The NCOP would need to resolve this issue of public participation. Advertisements calling for input on the three bills had been placed. Nobody had requested the chance to make an oral submissions. COSATU had provided a written submission and said it would be available for an oral submission if required.

Mr Mohapi said that in previous meetings the legal advisor had referred to the constitutional court cases involving Doctors For Life.

Ms Gordon said she agreed with the Deputy Minister's comments that there was no absolute requirement.

The Committee, after discussion, felt itself able to take a vote on the three Bills in turn.

The Criminal Matters Amendment Bill; the Defence Laws and Repeal Amendment Bill and the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill were thus all adopted by the Committee.

Mr Mhlanga said that notwithstanding the adoption of the Defence Laws Bill, the submissions of the Khoisan had to be addressed by the relevant Department.

The meeting was adjourned.