Films & Publications Amendment Bill [B27B-2006]: further deliberations

Home Affairs

30 July 2008
Chairperson: Mr P Chauke (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The legal drafters involved in drafting the Films and Publications Amendment Bill presented the Committee with a summary of the changes agreed to so far by the Committee, and the Chairperson indicated that the purpose of this meeting was to finally agree on these changes, as well as to deal with any outstanding issues. It was noted that the definition of “domestic violence” was not the same as the definition in the Domestic Violence Act and the word “the” was deleted. Clause 19 was also to be rephrased, and the specific offence mentioned was to be removed from clause 29, and replaced with a reference to “liable to an offence”. No changes were required to clause 21. In respect of clause 2, it was firstly suggested that the word “the” must be deleted from the definition of sexual violence. A query was raised on why this definition had been used, but was answered to the satisfaction of Members. It was confirmed that the definition of domestic violence was broad enough to cover members of the public who were not in family relationships. A suggestion was made to amend the definition of “explicit sexual conduct” and a new definition was agreed upon.

It was noted that the Bill must be finalised on 1 August, and the matter stood over until that date.

Meeting report

Films and Publications Amendment Bill: Further deliberations
The Chairperson welcomed the Deputy Minister of Home of Home Affairs.

He indicated that this was a follow-up meeting to that of 29 July, purely to summarise and agree upon the amendments made to the Films and Publications Amendment Bill by the Committee, and to determine if there were any outstanding issues.

Mr Deon Erasmus, Legal Adviser, Department of Home Affairs, tabled a document summarising the changes that had been agreed to by the Committee, in respect of the Films and Publications Amendment Bill (the Bill) on 29 July.

He firstly noted that in Clause 1, the definition of “domestic violence” was not the same as that in the Domestic Violence Act. He indicated that the definition in the Bill should therefore be rephrased from the way it was set out in the tabled document, and should include the words “and includes”

In respect of clause 2, Mr Erasmus indicated that, in respect of the definition of Sexual Violence, the word ‘the’ should be deleted.

He noted that clause 19 also should be rephrased, to read ‘subscribes, and adheres, is enforced’.

Mr Erasmus indicated that no changes would be needed to clause 21.

He suggested, in respect of clause 29, that rather than stating a specific offence as currently set out, the clause should rather be re-phrased to say ‘liable to an offence’.

Mr Iyavar Chetty, Acting CEO, Film and Publication Board, asked if all the decisions that had been taken the previous day were now incorporated in the tabled document. He indicated also that he was not satisfied with the definition of sexual violence, as set out in clause 2 of the document handed out.

A Member of the State Law Advisers’ panel said that several options were open to the Committee, and that one of these had been to include the definition of sexual conduct as previously defined in other legislation by the National Assembly. He indicated that there were compelling constitutional arguments which dictated otherwise, and it was therefore decided rather to incorporate the definition in the document.

Mr Chetty was comfortable with this answer.

Mr S Swart (ACDP) sought clarification from the Chairperson about the procedure to be followed in passing the Bill.

The Chairperson sought clarification from the legal advisors, but conflicting answers were given on the correct procedure.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting for five minutes so that the legal advisers could consult to determine the appropriate procedure to be followed.

On reconvening, the advisers noted that they had discussed the matter and were agreed that the Committee should finalise its proposed amendments by Friday 1 August.

Mr Swart asked the legal advisors if the definition of Domestic Violence covered members of the public who were not in family relationships.

The legal team confirmed that, with specific reference to the phrase ‘intimate relationship’, the definition was wide enough to cover members of the public from outside the family.

Mr Swart further wanted clarification on the definition of ‘explicit sexual conduct’ and wanted to know if the definition was detailed enough.

Mr Chetty stated that perhaps the word “explicit” should also have been independently defined. He and the legal advisers then discussed possible wording, and produced another definition, to read: ‘explicit sexual conduct, for the purposes of sections16 and 18, refers to graphic and detailed representation of any conduct contemplated in the definition section of this Act’.

The Committee Members agreed to this new definition.

The Chairperson indicated that the Committee would finalise the matter on Friday 1 August.

The meeting was adjourned.


  • 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: