Supreme Court Decree, 1990 (Ciskei) Amendment Bill: Briefing

Meeting report

SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
15 June 2001
SUPREME COURT DECREE, 1990 (CISKEI) AMENDMENT BILL: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr J L Mahlangu

Relevant Documents:
Supreme Court Decree, 1990 (Ciskei) Amendment Bill [B15 - 2001]

SUMMARY
The Supreme Court Decree, 1990 (Ciskei) Amendment Bill makes provision for the Bisho High Court in the old Ciskei area to utilise the court facilities in East London for the hearing of civil cases. The committee was concerned that the problem was not an isolated one but a common phenomenon in many of the previous TBVC states. The committee's concerns were put to rest when they were informed that legislation was in the pipeline that would lead to the rationalisation of all the courts in South Africa.

MINUTES
Supreme Court Decree, 1990 (Ciskei) Amendment Bill
Mr Johan De Lange (Legal Advisor of the Department of Justice) said the Bill aims to amend the Supreme Court Decree, 1990 (Decree No. 43 of 1990), of the former Ciskei. This is as a result of a request put forward by Judge Pickard of the Bisho High Court that they be allowed to use facilities in East London for the purposes of hearing civil cases. The Bisho High Court would continue to have no jurisdiction over the Eastern Cape area, as it would still function under the Decree. The Bisho High Court is still functioning under the old legislation and an amendment was necessary to enable them to have sittings outside of Ciskei due to practical problems with accommodation.

Discussion
The question was raised as to why the word "must" was used instead of saying that the court "may" sit anywhere.

Mr De Lange said that it would be possible to use the word "may" but that this would indicate a discretionary power in deciding where to sit. Rather, the situation called for a direction by the Judge that they "must" at a designated place.

Mr P Matthee (KZN, NNP) asked what would happen should a similar situation arise in other TBV states.

Mr De Lange said that the situation in the Ciskei was the only such one at the present time and they had opted for the practical solution of simply amending the Act.

The Chairperson asked when the court decides to sit at a particular place is the decision purely taken on the basis that the building itself is required to be used.

Mr De Lange stated that it was in fact so and that the Court totally lacks jurisdiction in those particular areas.

The Chair pointed out that the situation was the same in Venda and Bophutatswana. Persons living just outside these areas have to travel all the way to Pretoria to have their cases heard when they have a closer court at hand. He asked when this situation would be addressed.

Mr De Lange conceded that anomalies do exist and that a Bill on the internal rationalisation of the courts was currently being tabled. The issue is a complex one and could not be addressed over night. Parliament is aware of it and steps are being taken to address it. Mr De Lange said that the Supreme Court Act gives the Minister the power to alter jurisdictional boundaries of courts within South Africa but unfortunately this does not include the former TBVC states. The proposed Bill however makes provision for this. It is an interim solution to address the problem but many questions still require answering.

The meeting was adjourned.