Nominees to PAN South African Language Board (PANSALB); Visit by Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organisatio

Arts and Culture

15 June 2001
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

15 June 2001

Chairperson: Dr W. Serote

Documents handed out

Draft Programme of Action - Working Plan 2001
Action Plan - Visit to Vlakplaas ·
Report of the Committee's Sub-Committee on Science and Technology

The process of nominating seven candidates to the PAN South African Language Board (PANSALB) was discussed by the Committee. The need for transparency and the involvement of State Law Advisers was emphasised.

The Committee was informed on the visit by the Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organisation to South Africa. The Action Plan for the Visit to Vlakplaas was presented.

PANSALB Nominees
The Chair informed the Members of the Committee that State Law Advisers had advised the Committee to follow the Act with regard to the process of the nominees to PANSALB.

The Executive did not have to be consulted. The process was clear and they had to follow it. He also asked the Members to go through the CVs of the candidates.

Mrs Van Wyk (NNP) wanted to know whether the thirteen candidates whose applications had been unsuccessful had been informed about their failure, Is there clarity on the legal position for the remaining seven because the Act is silent on this issue? Would this number be increased?

The Chair contended that there is nowhere where the Act says a particular number should be appointed or augmented. State Law Advisers had advised the Committee to proceed with the seven nominees and make recommendations to the Ministry. In doing that the Committee should reach consensus.

Pertaining to the thirteen candidates who had not been short-listed, Ms Tsheole (ANC) was of the view that those candidates did not have to be considered. The recommendation of the Committee to the Minister had been based on broad representation. The Committee had ensured that it balanced languages with skills. It had transpired that that some nominees had skills but they were not representative of the South African languages. She also appealed to the Committee to be flexible during the interviews because the Act does not spell out the guidelines.

Mr Opperman (DP) concurred with her and he added that flexibility should be coupled with responsibility.

The Chair advised the Committee to look at what its responsibilities are. The responsibilities are to apply the law and to facilitate it for the functional structures of democracy. As far as he was concerned, both these duties had been carried out. However, the Committee should demonstrate to the public the process is transparent and that it has followed the law. The Law Advisers need to be involved in the process.

Mrs Van Wyk was pleased with the Chair's suggestion that the Legal advisers should also partake.

Mr Cassim (IFP) was of the view that a public announcement had to be made so that everything could be transparent.

Ms Tsheole who reminded the Committee of its constitutional responsibility to report to Parliament echoed a similar sentiment. Accordingly, Parliament had to be informed about this issue.

Mrs Van Wyk argued that right at the outset, the process was totally flawed. The Committee had not been informed about who were the members of the Ad Hoc Committee, and that even at the present moment the Committee is still left in the dark.

Dr Beukes (Head of Language Planning from the Department) stated that the Minister had written the letter to the Committee informing it about the constitution of the Ad Hoc Committee.

Mrs Van Wyk denied this.

Ms Tsheole confirmed that the issue had been brought to the attention of the Committee and this had taken place during the local elections.

Mrs Van Wyk said that if that were the case, then she would like to get the list of the Members of the Ad Hoc Committee from the Committee Section.

Mr Cassim said that he had a problem with Mrs Van Wyk's statement that the process was "totally flawed". The Committee should discuss these deficiencies.

The Chair replied that he thought that Mrs Van Wyk meant deficiencies when she said "totally flawed". He then closed the matter.

Visit by World Intellectual Property Organisation
The Chair informed the Committee on the visit to South Africa by the Director-General of the World Intellectual Property Organisation. The DG would arrive on the 20 June 2001, but he did not know when he would be available to meet the Committee

Action Plan Visit to Vlakplaas
The Chair said that not all the Members would be able to go to Vlakplaas because of the diversity of issues which the Committee had to deal with. However, he assured the small parties that they would be represented.

Sub-Committee Report
The Members were asked to read this document so that they would be prepared to discuss this when Professor Mohammed presents it

The Committee Budget Proposal
This item was deferred to the next meeting

The meeting was adjourned.



No related


No related documents


  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: