Repeal of Black Administration Act and Amendment of Certain Laws Bill: adoption

Meeting report

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
9 November 2005
REPEAL OF BLACK ADMINISTRATION ACT AND AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN LAWS BILL: ADOPTION

Chairperson: Kghoshi L Mokoena (ANC) [Limpopo]

Documents handed out
Repeal of Black Administration Act and Amendment of Certain Laws Bill [B25B-2005]
Mpumalanga Province Final Mandate
Limpopo Province Final Mandate
Gauteng Province Final Mandate
Western Cape Province Final Mandate
Northern Cape Province Final Mandate
Kwazulu-Natal Province Final Mandate
Committee Amendments to Bill
Committee Report on Bill

SUMMARY
The Department of Justice and Constitutional Affairs took the Committee through the primarily technical amendments it had proposed to the Bill, as well as the Committee Report on the Bill. Even though some of the provinces had not yet forwarded a final mandate to the Committee, it was noted that all nine provinces supported the Bill in principle. The Committee passed the Bill, with amendments. As a parting remark the ANC expressed its view that the Cross-Boundary Municipalities Law Repeal Bill should in fact be tagged as a Section 76 Bill because there was a great need for public hearings to be held in the provinces.

MINUTES
Introduction by Chairperson
The Chair welcomed all to the meeting and extended a special welcome to Ms Hussain, Acting Chairperson of the Eastern Cape Provincial Legislature Committee.

Mr L Basset, Department of Justice and Constitutional Development: Legal Drafter, introduced the delegation: Mr K Molalathoko, Principal State Law Adviser and Ms T Skosana, Senior State Law Advisor.

Ms R Razak, State Law Advisor, asked whether the Committee would be discussing the Constitution Twelfth Amendment Bill today, as indicated in the Order Paper.

The Chair replied that the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Affairs was supposed to have passed that Bill on the previous day, so that this Committee could consider that Bill at this meeting. The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Affairs had unfortunately not yet passed the Bill. The drafters of that Bill decided that it would then not be worthwhile to brief the Committee today on that Bill, as it would only be an informal briefing because the Bill had not yet been passed by the National Assembly. He apologised for the turn of events.

Ms Razak thanked the Chair for the insight, and requested that she thus be excused from the meeting.

The Chair agreed.

Repeal of Black Administration Act and Amendment of Certain Laws Bill
The Chair requested the Department to report back to the Committee on the amendments it had effected in the previous meeting.

Mr Molalathoko took Members through the document entitled "Select Committee Amendments to Bill", and noted that they were primarily technical amendments. He noted that the Committee proposed the deletion of the reference to the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act of 2003 from the long title of the Bill.

The Chair asked whether the Department of Provincial and Local Government and Department of Land Affairs wished to raise any concerns with the Bill.

Ms M Chetty, Department of Land Affairs: Parliamentary Legal Officer, answered in the negative. The only requirement imposed on her Department was in the Committee’s Report on the Bill, which requested her Department to report back to the Committee by 31 January 2006 on progress made with regard to enacting appropriate substitute legislation on the two issues listed in the Committee Report.

Mr Bassett informed the Committee that none of the amendments would affect the Department of Provincial and Local Government, save for the requirement imposed on it in the Committee’s Report on the Bill that it report back to the Committee by 31 January 2006 on progress made with regard to enacting appropriate substitute legislation on the two issues listed in the Committee Report.

The Chair requested the Department to take the Committee through the Report, as they had prepared it.

Committee Report on Bill
Mr Molalathoko took the Committee through the Report.

The Chair noted that the Committee agreed to the Report, and commended the Department on producing an outstanding Report that accurately and succinctly encapsulated all the relevant issues.

Mr M Mzizi (IFP) [Gauteng] referred to the Committee’s instructions to the Department in the Report and asked whether the Committee would also be instructing the Department to research the protection of propriety rights of Jewish marriages as well.

Mr Bassett responded that this would be investigated, but contended that rabbi’s fell within the ambit of the Marriages Act.

Mr Mzizi asked whether the practice of polygamy would also be considered, especially as there were certain cultural groups within South Africa in which women had more than one male spouse.

Mr S Shiceka (ANC) [Gauteng] replied that it would not be considered by the Department because it was not a practice that was widely followed by society. He proposed that the Committee consider the matter further in January 2006.

Mr J Le Roux (DA) [Eastern Cape] agreed with Mr Shiceka that the Committee consider the matters in January 2006, and commended the Department on the excellent Report.

Mr Molalathoko responded that the issue of polygamy was covered in the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act.

Mr Mzizi asked whether the African customary practice in which the surviving brother took over his deceased’s brother’s wife would also be researched by the Department.

Mr Shiceka responded that the issues raised by Mr Mzizi were very important as they were the reality that faced so many South Africans on a daily basis. The fact of the matter was that people could choose whether they wanted to follow this practice, or whether they did not. It was not mandatorily imposed on everyone.

Mr Bassett replied that the Department’s research would cover all categories of vulnerable women. He thanked the Committee for the words of praise.

The Chair noted that the Committee agreed to the Report.

Motion of desirability
The Chair read out the Motion of Desirability, to which the Committee agreed. He noted that the support of at least six provinces was needed in order for the Committee to pass the Bill.

Eastern Cape Final Mandate
Mr Le Roux noted that his province supported the Bill.

Free State Final Mandate
Mr D Worth (DA) [Free State] noted that his province supported the Bill.

The Chair noted that the Free State provincial legislature had not provided a final mandate, but that they approved the Bill in principle.

Gauteng Province Final Mandate
Mr Shiceka noted that his province supported the Bill.

Kwazulu-Natal Province Final Mandate
Mr Z Ntuli (ANC) [Kwazulu-Natal] noted that his province supported the Bill.

Limpopo Province Final Mandate
The Chair noted that his province supported the Bill.

Mpumalanga Province Final Mandate
Ms F Nyanda (ANC) [Mpumalanga] noted that her province supported the Bill.

Northern Cape Province Final Mandate
Mr L Fielding (DA) [Northern Cape] noted that his province supported the Bill.

North-West Province Final Mandate
Mr A Moseki (ANC) [North West] noted that his province had not provided a final mandate, but nevertheless approved the Bill.

Western Cape Province Final Mandate
The Chair informed Members that Mr N Mack (ANC) [Western Cape] was unable to attend the meeting because he was very ill and had to be hospitalised. He however acknowledged receipt of that province’s final mandate, which supported the Bill.

Adoption of Bill
The Chair noted that the Bill had received the support of no less than seven provinces. The Bill was thus passed by the Committee, as amended.

Concluding remarks
Mr Bassett, Mr Molalathoko and Ms Skosana thanked the Committee for the valuable input of the Committee and the useful interaction in passing the Bill.

Mr Shiceka thanked the drafting team from the Department on behalf of the Committee, commended them for their professional work and looked forward to future interactions.

He expressed the shock of the NCOP at the tagging of the Committee that the Cross-Boundary Municipalities Law Repeal Bill as a Section 75 Bill. The NCOP believed it should be tagged a Section 76 Bill because the communities were expecting public hearings to be held in the provinces on the Bill, as it affected their day-to-day lives. He stated that he was of the view that public hearings were in fact needed in the provinces.

Secondly, he stated that he had been informed that a municipality in Kwazulu-Natal had been dissolved, which was an extraordinary event. The Committee had however planned to visit that municipality but Parliament rejected the proposal. He suggested that the dissolution could possibly have been prevented had the Committee been allowed to properly exercise its oversight function.

The Chair thanked Mr Shiceko for the report back. He agreed with Mr Shiceko that that Bill should be tagged a Section 76 Bill as public hearings were needed in the provinces.

The meeting was adjourned.