Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 14 Nov 2023


No summary available.



Watch here: Plenary 


The House met at 14:01.

House Chairperson Ms M G Boroto took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.




The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, and hon members, I move that this report be adopted. Thank you very much.


There was no debate.



Motion agreed to.

Report accordingly adopted.




(Second Reading Debate)


THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: House Chairperson, chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Transport, the hon Mina Lesoma, hon members of the Portfolio Committee on Transport, hon Members of Parliament, ladies, and gentlemen. As we present the Marine Oil Pollution Bill for a second reading debate before this august House, we must be mindful of our international and national obligations to protect the oceans and life at sea.


South Africa is a party to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973. When the convention was adopted by the International Maritime Organization, IMO, in 1973, five annexes formed part of it and in 1997 the IMO adopted and amended protocol. Through the 1997 protocol, the 1973 convention was amended to include annexure

6 to the existing five annexes. The convention was enacted into a domestic law in the Maritime Pollution Act 2 of 1986.

Hon House Chairperson, the primary intention of this Bill is to follow the missing gap in South Africa's marine pollution strategy in relation to preparedness and response in the event that our waters are faced by an oil spill and to further regulate the disposal of sewage from ships.


The Bill therefore amends the principal Act to accommodate and incorporate annexure 4 and annexure 6. The annexure 4 regulates the activities for treatment and safe disposal of sewage waste from ships. It will assist maritime authorities to deal with the restriction of the discharging of sewage in order to reduce the nutrients caused by sewage discharge from passenger ships into the sea.

Annexure 6 is the main global instrument that addresses ships, energy efficient management and greenhouse emissions from ships. Its purpose is for the prevention, reduction, and control of marine pollution from the air, or indirectly through the air and to preserve the maritime environment through the complete elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances, as well as minimizing the accidental discharge of such substances.

The ships will be required to use fuel with no more than 0,5% sulphur content or use approved fuel treatment system called scrubbers. The proposed amendment will ensure that South Africa, in line with International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, popularly referred to as MARPOL Convention, imposes mandatory obligations for ships to ensure the treatment and safe disposal of sewage from ships in a manner that will not endanger the marine environment.

House Chairperson, shipping plays a critical role in South Africa's economy, considering that in excess of 80% of our trade is conducted through the oceans. Shipping is therefore more than the mere transportation of goods to international markets, but also plays an important role as an enabler of international trade.


The shipping environment has an ever-present threat of pollution emanating from the thousands of ships traversing our waters on a daily basis. This therefore requires stricter and more focused actions to respond to spillages at sea and decisively reduce the impact of oil pollution to the marine ecosystem and life at sea.

Any damage to the marine environment has far reaching negative impact on the marine ecosystem, particularly in ports and the broader ocean economy value chain. The protection of the marine environment, underpinned by an all-time ready oil pollution response capacity and capability will deliver immense benefits for South Africa's Bill economic strategy, including the preservation of jobs for coastal communities, in particular.


One of the challenges facing our response capacity and capability is the absence of a dedicated funding source to enable the Republic to be in a state of preparedness and response. The repurposing of the SA Maritime Safety Authority Maritime Fund to Oil Pollution Preparedness Fund, as proposed in the Bill will solve this challenge by raising the level of funding required to ensure that we maintain a state of marine oil pollution preparedness and response that the convention requires.


Hon Members, the passage of this Bill by this House will further strengthen our role and contribution to global governance of the oceans’ economy. I therefore implore you to support this Bill. I thank you, Chairperson.

Ms R M M LESOMA: Hon House Chair, the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, Ministers and the Deputy Ministers present, colleagues, hon members, fellow South Africans. It does give us a sense of comfort that we present this Bill. We must start by saying that we would like to appreciate and thank all the hon members of the portfolio committee who actively participated in the processing of the Bill. Secondly, I want to thank all the stakeholders that are in the maritime space or having an interest, having submitted their written and oral submissions as it is expected.


By its nature, this Bill is more focusing on coastal areas that hence it’s a maritime oil pollution ... [Inaudible.] ... the preparedness responses for operation, and the report was tabled before Parliament in March 2022 and all the requirements of public participation. Of course, it must be recorded, hon members and House Chair, that the majority of the provinces that don’t have or enjoy the coastal line, they didn’t have any appetite to contribute on the Bill, but we appreciate those provinces that has done that. Also, what we are saying is that several submissions were made, but this Bill is more of a technical Bill that speaks to number of issues, the explanatory meaning of the coastal and maritime, as it were, secondly, the technical meanings of the Bill and also alignment with the international protocols that expect us as the South Africans to be aligned on.

We must say and register that the object of the Bill, in particular, it’s one that seeks to deal with the grammatic, drafting, and the cross-referencing corrections were needed based on the submissions requested, received more protection and stronger risk assessment or risk policies with regard to the maritime and other wildlife that may be affected by marine oil spills, in sessions were made into include references to species most at risk, as well as the old white life as it may, as well as extending the responsibilities to the operations within the vicinity of the colony in the relevant sections of the Bill were included.

Also, the Bill seeks to give clarity which provides through the amendment to clarify and indicate who bears the cost of the maritime oil pollution risk assessment and the time frames within which this must be done, and we must register that at a portfolio committee level, we did spend a reasonable time in terms of whether should we be prescriptive in the Bill, or should we be open-ended, but we felt that there must also be specific timelines that are put within the Bill, so that it’s very explicit as to when and who does what, in terms of if there’s any eventuality of spillages. Thus, indicating that the owner or the operator of of any port facility or handling facility or offshore installation, must at its cost after two years of the of the commencement of this act under which maritime oil pollution risk assessment will take place.

We must say that in the back of the Bill is the understanding that the department will ensure that the training of relevant stakeholders and interested parties will be trained and a phase in approach will happen within which there is enough time for the Bill after two years to be implemented fully. The following concerns we must register that they were raised in the submission and in session. What was proposed is that it required adequately trained personnel which are fit and proper in terms of dealing with such issues which deals with the ships falling within the MARPOL regime, along with the other already proposed requirements per the Bill.

Clarity also was further sourced and inserted in providing on what would constitute a small, medium or large spill by making reference to the tonnage of the spills as transboundary operations. Adding to the functions of the inspectorate of inspectors, they allow us to consider samples or the photographic evidence from the and old wildlife which may not

necessarily be from the installation and oiling handling facility or port facility. Adding to the list of the offenses that they build also seeks to be explicit in the instances where the air person provides a false statement or account of events related to the policing incident that attempts to hide or conceal the extent of the of oil pollution as it were.

Hon House Chair and hon members, we must say that there was not much of disagreement in the committee other than the comprehension and understanding of what it means and all that, but as we close, we must agree that the Bill is based on international convention on all pollution preparedness and readiness developed by the International Maritime Organisation, IMO, which intentionally regulates maritime activities, especially shipping. South Africa is a member of the International Maritime Organisation, IMO, since its readmission to the United Nations system in 1995 and has previously served on the IMO council.

Hon House Chair, the purpose then, in summary, is to be aligned with the international conventions, and which will harmonise South Africa’s laws and international laws in relation to the maritime oil pollution. Parties to the International Convention of the Oil Pollution Preparedness

Response and Co-operation, OPRC, are required to establish measures for dealing with the pollution incidents either in nationally or in co-operation with other countries. Further, the parties to the convention are required to provide assistance to others in the in the event of the pollution emergency and provision is made for the reimbursement of the any assistance provided co-operation with the industry players and other countries to deal with the oil pollution, as you understand and appreciate that the the coastal lines and waters move across boundaries, countries and the world.

Hon House Chair and fellow South Africans, co-operation with the industry players and other countries which has to deal with the oil pollution is critical in international waters, as well as the fact that there are only a few countries which have offshore oil pollution control capabilities and capacities, South Africa is one of those countries that have global advantage in this regard as oil pollution control and some possesses maritime oil pollution in capabilities and have practical experience in dealing with the incidents.

However, the polluter-pays principle ensures that the financial burden is not borne by the country or for the maritime or pollution incident does not lie with the fiscus of

the country. With that, hon House Chair, here we are to present the Marine Oil Pollution Bill as adopted and recommended to the House for the adoption and consideration. Thank you very much.


Mr T B MABHENA: Hon House Chairperson, on behalf of the DA, I would like to extend our sympathy and condemn in the strongest terms the attempted hijacking of the Minister of Transport along the Gauteng’s N3 highway. We believe that it is wrong and needs to be looked into and we hope that she is recovering and doing well.


This legislation is important in preserving and protecting marine life and fostering the blue economy. Once enacted into domestic law this Bill will give effect to the 1990 International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation. The ocean economy can serve as a crucial economic driver, particularly for developing nations like South Africa. Unfortunately, under an ANC-government, our country faces unemployment rates exceeding 40% by the expanded definition.


To address this issue, the ocean economy could play a vital role, but it hinges on having legislation that safeguards marine habitats and life. Therefore, it is imperative to establish regulations governing oil spillage into our aquamarine ecosystem with stringent preventative measures and financial consequences for offenders, but more importantly, oil spills can cause severe damage to marine ecosystems affecting fish, birds and other wildlife. The toxic components of oil can disrupt the reproductive and feeding behaviours of marine species.


South Africa is endowed with diverse coastal marine life and thus we bear a responsibility to protect it. Regulation 5 of this Bill assumes significance in conducting risk assessments for national oil pollution. However, we believe that a waiting period of two years is excessive, ideally within six to 12 months of the Act coming into effect, the relevant authority should conduct the initial risk assessment. Subsequently, a follow-up risk assessment should be carried out within two to three years.


While we acknowledge that the Bill addresses causality for new developments altering the risks of marine oil pollution incidents, we advocate for proactive preparedness rather than a reactive stance. Our stance on this risk assessments is influenced by their role in the Minister’s decision-making

process regarding their approval or denial of proposed new port oil facilities or offshore installations.


The Western Cape-run provincial government and the City of Cape Town Metro were the only regional governments that have full appreciation of the importance of protecting our marine life from marine oil pollution. The ANC-run coastal provinces and municipalities didn’t even bother to make any submission in such a key and important piece of legislation. It was so bad and so awkward to such an extent that an ANC member of the committee even asked the question to say whether other coastal provinces and municipalities had been excluded from making submissions on this piece of legislation. Then they had to explain to him that this is public information, widely advertised for public comment and stakeholder submission.


If the ANC-run provinces and municipalities were not represented, it simply meant that they are incompetent, sleeping on the job and have very little regard for the protection of marine life against marine oil pollution. All I could say is that this is the DA difference, and that clear blue water policies and governance are at play. The DA is leading, while others are busy chasing corruption in their own provinces.

With that said, we agree with the submissions of the Western Cape provincial government that the Bill must be clear on how provincial governments and municipalities will be involved when oil pollution incident has occurred. Furthermore, there is a call for clear communication structures to be put in place to ensure that provincial governments and municipalities are informed about incidents and the actions taken to deal with these incidents.


Then the South African Foundation for Conservation of Coastal Birds, SANCCOB, made some very good contributions into the Bill. We also echoed their sentiments in the committee that ship-to-ship fuel transfers must be included in the risk assessment. Though the Bill made the proud mention of high- risk areas of oil and gas exploration, extraction, or decommissioning applications, but nothing specific to this practice. We fully agree with SANCCOB that these specifics must find expression into the Bill.


Furthermore, research scientist, Willis and others, published a paper in 2021 and made an observation that increasingly the ocean has typically been viewed as a sink for pollution. This is problematic and points to the urgent need for lawmakers to act with speed decisively and develop policies that will

protect our ecological systems. As such, South Africa is no exception ... [Interjections.] That is why you are busy howling there; you are not listening. Nonetheless, we would like to say that the Democratic Alliance supports this Bill because ... [Interjections.] Ah, but you can ask the question and stop doing that nonsense. Ask your question.


The Democratic Alliance supports this Bill because we recognise and appreciate that the prevention of marine oil pollution is crucial for safeguarding the health of marine ecosystems, protecting human health, sustaining economies and fulfilling international commitments to environmental stewardship. It requires a combination of regulatory measures, technological advancements and a shift towards sustainable and clean energy practices.


When hon John Steenhuisen comes into power next year as president of this country, we are going to ensure that the DA

... [Interjections.] Listen, we are even polling beyond 50%, but you are making noise there. I am saying that when hon John Steenhuisen comes into ... [Interjections.]



AN HON MEMBER: You are the one who is making noise.

Mr T B MABHENA: ... power, we are going to make sure that we prioritise marine oil pollution and make sure that we put into place legislation to ensure that ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order! Order! I can’t hear the member. Proceed ... [Interjections.]


Mr T B MABHENA: I can’t even hear myself.




The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, you are provocative, hon member ... [Interjections.]



Mr T B MABHENA: When hon John Steenhuisen becomes president next year, we are going to make sure that we protect marine oil pollution and make sure that we put legislation in place that will build the ecosystems and make sure that everything goes accordingly. Thank you very much.





Bayede, Ngwenyama!



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Information and Communication Technology, ICT, I realised something, and I have been told. Because we catch the members’ names, they are

using their background and whenever a member speaks here, only a letter or surname or name shows. So, we are unable to see who it is that is interfering. So, please, any member who opens their mic just mute them permanently, especially if it is a Z or an L because I am unable ... [Inaudible.] ... Okay. So, please mute those people. I can’t identify them.






Mr E MTHETHWA: Sihlalo ngokukhulu ukuzithoba ...





 ... may I pass our condolences to the family of Marc Rantseli of MarcAlex Fame who has just passed on. May his soul rest in peace. House Chair, the EFF supports the Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and Co-operation Bill. This legislation is a critical step in safeguarding our marine, biodiversity and ecosystem, which are vital for South Africa’s economic and environmental health. Our oceans full of life are under constant threat from oil pollution. This Bill therefore is not just a regulatory framework, it is a commitment to preserve our natural heritage. However, while the Bill’s introduction is commendable, it requires significant strengthening to be truly. Firstly, the Bill’s approach to stakeholder engagement

needs re-evaluation. Section 11 (3), which allows for industry representatives in the incident management organisation must ensure that it does not become a platform for corporate interests only. Instead, we advocate for a balanced representation that includes environmental groups and community representatives. It’s imperative to hear the voices of those directly impacted by the marine oil pollution.



Moreover, the Bill lacks specificity in is punitive measures. Companies that fail to adhere to the regulations should face stringent penalties. We propose the introduction of higher safety standards and clear, enforceable penalties for noncompliance. A mere slap on the risk of environmental damage is unacceptable. Another critical point of concern is the Bill’s timeline for risk assessment. A five-year interval is far too long and reflective of a reactive rather than a proactive approach to the environmental protection. We propose annual or bi-annual risk assessments to properly identify and mitigate the impacts of oil operations.


The change is essential for a government that truly cares about its marine resources. Further, the Bill must prioritise regular inspections and monitoring. This will ensure that transportation activities comply with environmental

regulations. We also emphasize the need for a regulatory body to oversee the inspections, preventing potential conflicts of interest and ensuring fairness of all companies, particularly small and medium enterprises. In addition, we cannot overlook the importance of advancing research and development in this area. Investing in technologies for preventing oil spillage, automatic detection and efficient cleanup response or methods is crucial. This investment not only aides in immediate response effort but also aligns with global best practices in marine conservation.



The Bills regional focus is commendable, but we must expand our scope. Engagement should not be limited to neighbouring countries but should extend to the entire African continent and other international partners. Such collaborations can lead to an exchange of knowledge, resources and best practices in managing oil spills.



In closing, the Economic Freedom Fighters recognise the Bill as a positive step but assert that it requires significant enhancements. It must be more inclusive, stringent and proactive. Our commitment to protecting our marine life and ecosystem must be unwavering and reflect in every clause of this Bill. We support this Bill with the expectation of these

crucial amendments being incorporated, ensuring a robust, effective and inclusive framework from for marine oil pollution. Thank you, House Chair, and that’s it from me. At least ...





... namhlanje ayiphelanga.




Mr K P SITHOLE: Thank you, hon Chairperson, the consideration of marine oil pollution is a critical aspect of our national security and environmental stewardship coming from conventional oil pollution, greatness, response and co- operation. It is imperative that South Africa works towards ensuring that the responsible use of resources, economic growth and Environmental Protection can go hand-in-hand. The OPRC present a vital framework through which can achieve this delicate balance. We must use the opportunity once that is presented by the OPRC, through fostering international co- operations, collaboration, enhancing our national security by mitigating this associated with oil pollution accident. A robust response system ensures the protection of our coastlines, maritime activities, and economic stability that relies on their vital resources.

It is recommended that South Africa looks into developing and implementing a robust monitoring system to track the movement of oil spill and facility, timely reporting and action responses. This could be done through the use of satellite technology to maritime. We must ensure that we take the necessary punitive measures and ensure regulatory efficiency. As with Public-private partnership, there need to be one attain responsible in South Africa, where both the government and private individuals are held responsible for their actions, which will have a genuine influence on their future generation of this country. We should look to introduce penalties for noncompliance in accordance with the ORPRC.



The Inkatha Freedom Party is concerned about the current government’s ability to sufficiently give meaning to the Convention and the build through the resource allocation and the implementation challenge that may be brought about. Our current economic outlook has provided by the Minister of Finance is incredible blank and such an important piece of legislation may like fall on deaf ears among the competition for other interests and the need for government investment, regular training drills and exercise for response teams are at the core of ensuring lateness in the event of oil spill.

As we stand here today debating this topic, I’m almost certain the different government departments do not know what role this may have in the event of oil spill. It is the responsibility of the Department of Environment to take care of the entire mess. What about the border management and policing apprehending the details of offending vessels? When should the Minister of International Relations, activities and dictates oil spills, enable training and ability to respond properly to the accident even in remote of offshore areas? The IFP supports the Bill. Thank you very much.



Mr P MEY: Marine Oil Pollution (Preparedness, Response and Co- operation) Bill. To give effect to the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co- operation, 1990; and to provide for matters connected therewith.




Die doel van die wetsontwerp is om veilige en effektiewe beheer uit te oefen en die gebruik van bronne om die storting van olie te beheer en te voorkom. Samewerking met buurlande is ook baie belangrik om oliebesoedeling wat deur skepe ... en op die land geskied te verminder en te beheer.

Wye magte is ook aan inspekteurs gegee. Waar daar redelike gronde bestaan dat die skip ’n oortreding begaan het of waar daar in of op die skip enige artikel mag wees wat as bewysstuk kan dien binne die territoriale waters van die Republiek of ’n Suid-Afrikaanse skip op enige ander plek in die wêreld, mag die inspekteur so ’n skip stop en daarop beslag lê.



Wat het aanleiding tot die wetsontwerp gegee? Oliebesoedeling vind meestal plaas as gevolg van lekkasies of storting wat in groot hoeveelhede in die see vrygelaat word, met verwoestende gevolge vir die seelewe. Oliebesoedeling is nadelig vir seevoëls, asook vis en skulpvis. Regoor die wêreld kry ons gespesialiseerde persone asook veeartse wat na die wildlewe wat met olie besoedel is omsien. Die persone is opgelei om diere wat met olie besmet is skoon te maak, te rehabiliteer en weer vry te laat. Kaapstad en Port Elizabeth beskik elk oor so ’n eenheid wat vir die rehabilitasie van diere verantwoordelik is. Ek het die voorreg gehad om Port Elizabeth Cape Recife al te besoek.



Orals langs die Suid-Afrikaanse kus vind ons egter vrywilligers wat hulle beywer om diere te red. Die belangrikste oorsake van besoedeling in die see is die direkte storting van afval in die see en die vloei vanaf die land na

die see as gevolg van reën. Slegs een liter olie kan tot een miljoen liter water besoedel. Dit verhoed dat plante en diere wat in water leef suurstof kry en dus vrek. Die besoedeling vanaf die stede en voertuie na die see is nou 20 keer hoër as

20 jaar gelede. Dit gebeur dat reën die olie vanaf die stede na riviere laat afloop en so in die oseaan beland.


Ongelukke deur skepe veroorsaak dat groot hoeveelhede olie gestort word en ernstige besoedeling vind dan plaas. Dit is wyd deur die media gedek en het die publiek bewus gemaak van hierdie ongelukkige gebeurtenisse. Tydens so ’n oliestorting kan groot skade gely word en die wetsontwerp maak voorsiening vir skadevergoeding wat deur die benadeelde party geëis kan word.



Die belangrikste van die wetsontwerp is dat die land ten alle tye gereed moet wees, saam met ander lande moet werk en in kontak te bly. Skeepvaart speel ’n belangrike rol in die vervoer van vragte ... se lande en daarom is die beheer van oliebesoedeling baie belangrik.



Ek wil net noem dat gister in Nairobi, Kenya het 170 nasies toevallig begin om oor plastiekafval en hoe dit in die wêreld toeneem te praat. Die armste lande stort agt keer meer as wat

die ryk lande doen en daarom rus daar ’n verantwoordelikheid op ons almal, die regering, die provinsies en munisipaliteite om alles in ons vermoë te doen om die verspreiding van afval te verhoed. Dankie Voorsitter.





The FF Plus support this Bill. Thank you.




Mr W M THRING: Hon House Chairperson, the ACDP is cognisant that marine oil pollution poses a significant threat to the health of oceans with a knock-on effect to humans, wildlife, birds and marine animals. To address this worldwide challenge international efforts have been consolidated under the framework of this Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and Co-operation Bill.


South Africa is found along a major shipping routes with an estimated 30 000 vessels that passed our coastland annually. And regrettable, we have experienced several devastating oil spills worst of which includes the SS Wafra oil tanker that spilled in 1971 and the MV Treasure, which sank six miles off our coast in June 2000. Thousands of barrels of crude oil were leaked into the ocean and led to over 20 000 pigeons being covered in oil in one spill let alone other marine animals.

The ACDP agrees with Monica Stassen of the Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds, who argues that legislation and policy must be proactive in implementing evaluation of risk before a practice starts and if is found too risky, the practice must be stopped all together. The instance of ship-to

-ship fuel transfer known as bunkering currently taking place in Algoa Bay is common practice. This practice, however, takes place without any environmental impact assessment and there have been four oil spills since 2016 causing serious unintended consequences to the environment.


Hon House Chair, oil contains high levels of toxic chemicals including mercury, which can have dangerous effects on humans and oil spill-cleanup workers, for example, suffer from damaged immune, respiratory and cardiac functions and carry high levels of toxicity that have long-term consequences.



Additionally, people who eats sea food can also be exposed to traces of toxic chemicals and swimming in beaches with high levels of oil poses a saviour threat to human health.



The ACDP cautions that we should not pay lip service to marine oil pollution as this has serious consequences on human and

coastal health, the tourist industry and the economy. The ACDP support this Bill. I thank you.



Mr B N HERRON: Note House Chair, we have no declaration.




Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: House Chairperson, allow me by starting off by saying that the NFP will support this report tabled here today. But let me also remind this House on the latest report from the United Nations, which says Gaza is currently a children’s graveyard. Gaza is currently a children’s graveyard. That’s how many little babies’ bodies align. And what is this fight about? It’s the coastline? It’s the gas or the oil? Both strategically and Gaza has hundreds of years of stock fells. That’s what this oil is all about.



Chairperson, this particular Bill and its amendment was necessitated as a result of some of the weaknesses in the Bill and, of course, various submissions were received calling for more protection and stronger reassessment for risk policy about marine and other wildlife that maybe affected by marine oil spills.



Now I know we are talking about oil spills, but let me also say, let us not forget about the damage to the oceans by

sewage spills as well is quite a serious problem which affects the country as a whole, marine life, tourism etc.



Now this particular Bill clarifies, of course, to its amendment who will bear the cost of marine oil pollution, risk assessment and the timeline in which it will be done thus indicating that the owner or operator or any oil handling facilitator off shore installation must at its cost after two years’ the commencement of undertaking marine oil pollution risk assessment. Of course, time frame has been inserted, calling concerns raised, submissions were also made, a proposed that require adequately train personnel that must be present on ships falling within the mapped regime along with other already proposed requirements in the Bill.



The Bill also define what would constitute a small, medium or large Bill by referring to tarnish of spills adding to the function of inspector allowing to consider sample and geographic evidence. The NFP having considered this is quite satisfied and support the Bill. Thank you very much.


Mr S M JAFTA: House Chair, the Bill aims to provide for the safe, effective, and efficient management and deployment of resources in respect of spills of oil or any other pollutant

from ships or any act which pollutes or threatens to pollute South African waters, aquatic resources, coastline, or related interest.


The Bill is also progressive as it seeks to incorporate into our law the relevant provisions of the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation.



The South African Maritime Safety Authority will be the custodian of the Bill once the Bill is passed into law. The authority under the Bill, has been given additional functions, including establishing and maintaining the national marine oil pollution response equipment inventory.



The extra territorial work of the South African Maritime Safety Authority under the Bill will include establishing rapport with neighbouring countries with which South Africa has concluded a regional agreement.


This report will be predicated on providing advisory services, technical support, and equipment to the requesting country.

The application of the Maritime Pollution Control Act to the Bill is also commendable, in the main because it provides the

necessary coordination of functions and synergy. We support the Bill, House Chair, thank you very much.



Mr M G E HENDRICKS: House Chair, it is with great pleasure that Al Jama-h supports the Bill, and we would like to thank the portfolio committee for their hard work. Because in order to save the planet you need to save the oceans. And the future generations will also always be grateful for this portfolio committee.



The Bill focuses largely on oil pollution. But it also means that other forms of pollution of the ocean, and this was largely in the hands of the provision ... [Inaudible.] ... those blue scorpions ... [Inaudible.] ... that is why Al

Jama-h ... [Interjection.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): we can’t hear you. We are losing you hon Hendricks.



Mr M G E HENDRICKS: ... ok, House Chair, have you got me now?





Mr M G E HENDRICKS: Thank you very much. I was saying that we had the blue scorpions who wasn’t effective, but now this Bill provides for a more effective enforcement agency.


Al Jama-h is still worried about the effects of sewage pollution, where so much sewage is pumped into the ocean, and not ...



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): You are gone again.



Mr M G E HENDRICKS: ... clearly, our snoek you know, House Chair I think you like Cape Town snoek. Our snoek was poisoned

because of the sewage of the Zandvliet plant, run at the time by the DA, where they pumped millions of litres of sewage, raw sewage, poorly treated sewage in the ocean. And the blue scorpions, was hopeless to enforce a ... [Inaudible.] ... although we got three determinations against the mayor, at that time against the city.



But we are very happy that we are making tremendous progress with this Bill. And Al Jama-h supports this, Bill. Thank you very much, House Chairperson.



Muf M M RAMA?WA: Ndo livhuwa, Mulangadzulo wa Nn?u, kha vha ntendele ndi lumelise Tshimebi Tshihulwane, Vho Pemmy Majodina na Tshan?a tsha Tshimebi Tshihulwane, Vho Dorris Dlakude, Mira?o ya Buthano ?a Lushaka, vhadzulapo vha Afrika Tshipembe, ndi sa hangwi Dziminisita na Zwan?a zwa Dziminisita vha re hone fhano, ndi masiari. Muhulisei Mulangadzulo wa Nn?u ...





 ... the ANC supports the Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness Responses and Co-operation Bill. This Bill is one of the pieces of legislation which the Portfolio Committee on Transport is bringing before the House for consideration and approval. All the legislation on marine oil pollution are critical for the oceans and are based on international standard for the prevention and control of marine oil pollution. While it is correct that the country implements the highest safety and environment standard in all modes of transport, it is critical that the shipping industry can operate in an efficient and safer manner.


Given South Africa’s geographic location being far away from international markets, shipping plays a crucial role in ensuring economic development and growth for the country. The oceans economy serves the national economic interest of the

country both internally and externally. Internally, the ports and shipping industry are a major positive source of economic activity, which contributes to the gross domestic product, GDP, of the country and creates both direct and indirect jobs. As part of the development of the oceans economy and implementation of the Economic Reconstruction and Recovery Plan, the development of local coastal microeconomics is a crucial part of infrastructure development through the development of small harbours. Externally, the ports and shipping industry enabled the movement and transport of exports and imports for the country without which the country’s economy is unable to efficiently function.



This legislation before the House is critical to ensure the preservation of marine life and the ocean environment, which is critical to the wellbeing and growth of the economy.

Moreover, through preventing marine oil pollution, the country enables the efficient functioning of the shipping industry and ensures that the fishing industry can function in our territorial waters for the benefit of the country. This requires both legislation and regulation to ensure that there is no marine pollution in South African waters and to ensure that the country has the capacity and capability to deal with any marine oil pollution incidents. The Marine Oil Pollution

Preparedness Responses and Co-operation Bill is such legislation. The Bill is based on the international standards to ensure marine oil ...




Die HUISVOORSITTER (Me M G Boroto): Agb lid Hendricks, asseblief.



Ms M M RAMADWA: ... pollution control as it is applying to South African law and the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and Co-operation developed by the International Maritime Organisation. South Africa is a part of the International Maritime Organisation and as part of its international commitments, obliged to follow international maritime protocols and even apply them to South African law.

While it is important that South Africa applies the best international standards and practises as there is no logical reason as to why it should not apply international best practises ... However, the legislation also seeks to protect the country’s national economic interest. Therefore, it should be supported as it is based on best international standards and seeks to protect the marine environment and economy of the country.

This Bill seeks to ensure that the country has legislation which ensures that the country and all those in the marine oil industry in terms of shipping and facilities have a risk mitigation plan to prevent marine oil pollution and can deal with any incident. This Bill means that formative action must be taken to ensure safety and prevention first to prevent any marine oil pollution incident and having the capability and capacity to deal with any incident if it occurs. However, the preservation and sustainability of the marine environment is best-protected through having a risk mitigation plan, through ensuring a plan by all players in the shipping and oil industry and having safety and prevention plan to avoid marine oil pollution control.



There were many positive contributions which the portfolio committee received through written comments and oral presentations and not from one province. Several government departments and SOEs were consulted prior to the drafting of the Bill, such as Forestry, Fisheries and Environment, as well as Transnet. Presentations were received from the Southern African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds, Sanccob. We welcome the legislation as it is a significant step in improving South Africa’s preparedness for marine oil pollution. We were pleased to see that a wildlife response has

been included under several points of Bill. It also raised important matters on clearly defining the risk methodology to be used, as well as the ship-to-ship oil transfer, which happens at sea or on oil and gas exploration. This contribution was well-received and incorporated. The Sanccob also raised concerns around the level of capacity, personnel and resources within government and implemented the various activities listed in the Bill. The Sanccob strongly argues that the government determines the capacity required to implement the Bill successfully and plans for it accordingly. The South African Petroleum Industry Association, Sapia, also welcomed the legislation and use it as a key milestone in improving the institutional infrastructure and capacity to effectively manage marine oil spills in South Africa. The Sapia advocates for separation between land-based spills and marine spills as land-based spills are reported in terms of National Environmental Management Act. The Bill now deals with marine oil pollution, and not land-based spills.



It also suggested that the establishment of Marine Pollution Preparedness and Response Fund is a significant development and requires proper consultation and engagement via regulation. The department need to consult with stakeholders in this regard. A transparent process is necessary as this is

a critical part of implementation of the legislation on marine oil pollution. Stakeholders also contributed to the clarity of the definition and on risk assessment of the potential of and prevention of any incident of pollution. Amendments suggested the obligation to be placed on the owner and operator to undertake a marine oil pollution risk assessment. Failure to uphold this obligation will be the basis for the offence contemplated in section 31(b). Clarity was also provided through the amendment to clearly indicate who bears the cost of marine oil pollution risk assessment and the timeframes within which it must be done, thus indicating that the owner or operator of any port facility, oil handling facility or offshore installation must at its own cost after two years of the commencement of this Act, undertake marine oil pollution risk assessment.



Further details were required of the review panel on pollution incident. There will also be clarification of the protection of designated marine protected areas, approval of risk mitigation and prevention plans by a person rather than just an authority, as well as ensuring that staff is trained in oil pollution control. Clarity was also sought on the co- ordinating structure responsible for dealing with incidents, as well as the appointment of the panel to deal with oil spill

incidents and size of spill. There was strong focus on the protection of wildlife in marine areas such as birds and when there is an oil spill. Adding to the list of offences are instances where a person provides a false statement or account of event related to a pollution incident and an attempt to hide or conceal the extent of the oil pollution incidents.

There will be no additional financial implication to the budget of the department because of the enactment of the Bill. The department will need to discuss with Samsa the reprioritization of the budget to ensure that it is able to conduct inspections and acquire further equipment.



The Bill is timely in that there is increased shipping via the South African coastline. This is likely because the global economic activities have normalised post-COVID-19. Moreover, post-developments have taken cognizance of the fact that economies of scale of container shipping have increased the size of vessels to enable docking at domestic ports. This means that these vessels, like large carriers cannot go through the Suez Canal and must go around the South African coastline. Therefore, it is important that the country is prepared from a marine oil pollution perspective to start the prevention of any incident and to be able to deal with any incident given increase shipping traffic around the country

coastline. The portfolio committee approved the Bill with amendment as well as approve the committee report on the Bill.




Muhulisei Mulangadzulo wa Nn?u, sa komiti, ro dzula ra haseledza nga haya mafhungo a hoyu Mulayotibe. Ri ri kha lushaka lwa Afrika Tshipembe na vhadzulapo, ri a ?ivha uri ri bva ngafhi. Ho shuluwa malofha a tshi shulutshela heyi dimokirasi. Ri ri phan?a nga ANC, phan?a! Ri ri kha vha ?i?walise vha voutele ANC ...





... to defend the democratic gains.





Phan?a na ANC, phan?a! Ndo livhuwa. Aa!




The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: House Chairperson, I just want to thank all members who participated in this debate and thank them for supporting the Bill. This proves our understanding of the importance of preserving life at sea. Thank you, hon Mabhena, for the well wishes. We are recovering from the ordeal. I just want to indicate that our oceans are a national asset and they do not belong to any province, they belong to

all South Africans, and all of us on an equal basis, whether we are a landlocked province or coastal province. I also want to assure members who raised several issues that most of the details that they raised, some will be covered in the regulations, while others in the legislation itself, I also want to indicate the importance of prevention of any marine oil pollution. This time around, South Africa is being audited by International Maritime Organisation, IMO for the safety of life at sea. The auditors from Germany, Liberia, Turkey, and Cyprus arrived in South Africa during this past weekend, and the audit started on Monday. They will be here with us for two weeks. We do hope that we are going to make it in that debate, which of course will be confirming our commitment as we are adopting and supporting this Bill. Also, in December, South Africa will be standing for re-election into the International Maritime Organisation Council. We will be contesting in Part C, and 25 countries will be standing for 20 seats and South Africa will be contesting for the 20 seats. I know that all South Africans and Members of Parliament will be supporting South Africa for re-election. In that regard, I thank all the members. Thank you, Chairperson, for participating in the debate.



Question put: That the Bill be read a second time.

Agreed to.




Bill read a second time.






Mr G MAGWANISHE: Hon House Chairperson, hon Deputy President, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers, the Chief Whip of the Majority Party and hon members, in Women’s Legal Centre Trust vs the President of the Republic of South Africa and Others, the Constitutional Court recognised the importance of protecting Muslim women and children of Muslim marriages in the instance of the dissolution of a Muslim marriage. The nonrecognition of Muslim marriages in civil law means that a person who is married in terms of the Islamic law only, has no right to approach a court of law or a decree of divorce.



The Constitutional Court held that the Divorce Act of 1979, is inconsistent with the Constitutional. Section 6,7(3), section 9(1) of the Divorce Act of 1979 are unconstitutional. As on the dissolution of the marriage, these failed to safeguard the interest of a minor or dependent children of Muslim marriages in the same manner of children of other marriages. They also

failed to provide for the redistribution of assets and also failed to make provision for the forfeiture of matrimonial in the same terms as other dissolved marriages.


The court gave the executive and Parliament 24 months to remedy the constitutional defects that is by 28 June 2024. Although the court provided measures that apply in the meantime these lapse at the end of 24 months period.



The Department of Home Affairs is busy drafting a Single Marriage Bill which will also deal with divorce, but the legislation will not be finalised in time to meet the Constitutional Court deadline.



This Bill is therefore intended to address the identified constitutional defects to ensure that women in a Muslim marriage, children and dependents of Muslim marriages are protected.



This Bill does not constitute or replace an Islamic divorce. Persons who are in Muslim marriages and wish to be granted a religious divorce will still need to follow the Islamic law.

The Bill was introduced on the 20th of July 2023 and referred to the committee for consideration and report. I now table this report for your kind consideration. Thank you.


Declarations of Vote:


Mr W HORN: Hon House Chairperson, as stated in the report of the committee presented by the chairperson, this Bill aims to give effect to the judgment in the case of the Women’s Legal Centre Trust vs the President of the Republic of South Africa and Others, in which the Constitutional Court recognised the need for and importance of protecting Muslim women and children, particularly in instances of the dissolution of the Muslim marriage on the basis that nonrecognistion of such marriages has the practical and legal effect of unfairly discriminating against such women and minors.



Now House Chairperson, importantly and as is confirmed in the report and in line with this judgment, the Bill merely allows persons who are spouses in Muslim marriages to get divorced in terms of the civil law. It does not constitute or replace the Islamic divorce and it does not deal with a substantive divisions of Muslim personal law and Sharia law.

Now the Constitutional Court carefully avoided expressing an opinion on the constitutionality of the substantive provisions of the Sharia law. However, the reality is of course House Chairperson is that in dealing with divorces of persons who married in terms of the Muslim practices and law, our courts will henceforth be under the absolute obligation in terms of section 39 of the Constitution, to interpret and apply the amended Divorce Act in a manner that must promote this disparate, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. They will be only be able apply substantive provisions of the Sharia law during such divorce proceedings for as long as the rights afforded to persons in terms of this law are consistent with the Bill of Rights.



So, while the right to religious freedom we all enjoy, is not a lesser right than the other rights afforded to us in the Bill of Rights, it must be very clear that that in shying away from dealing with a less privileged position of women and children in Sharia law, we will be placing judicial officers in a very difficult position.



Hon House Chairperson, all of this could be avoided if this government dealt with the matter 20 years that has passed since the release of the SA Law Reformed Commission Report on

Islamic Marriages and Related Matters in 2003. A report that recommended recognition of these marriages and which proposed a raft of measures to register, regulate and deal with the desolation of Muslim marriages.



So, we appreciate the fact that to balance the competing rights in play will not be easy. The Constitution in section 15(1) provides that everyone has the freedom of conscience, religion, thought, believe and opinion, but in section 15(3)(a), it states that this section does not prevent legislation from recognising marriages or systems of personal or family law under any tradition, but adds that is very important that this can only be done as far as such recognition is consistent with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.



Hon House Chairperson, therefore, it is unavoidable that what will follow next is litigation to deal with for example the constitutionality of the Talak, defined as the dissolution of a Muslim marriage by a husband in a unilateral manner and in terms of a right only he enjoys, as well as a patrimonial consequences of such a dissolution of marriage by what is effectively a repudiation of the spouse.

Furthermore, it remains to be seen whether women, on their own behalf and on behalf of the minor children for which they will be responsible for through divorce will be able to asset the rights afforded to them by this amendment of process in the face of substantive provisions which for now could unfortunately only continue to work to entrench their fragile, socioeconomic position and the unfair discrimination they are subjected to over the substantive provisions of the law. And which was not dealt with by the Constitutional Court.



However, ultimately, as this is a small measure which in a little way will assist women and children in Muslim marriages, we will support this Bill. Thank you.




UGq B J MKHWEBANE: Lotjhani, Sihlalo.





Hon House Chairperson, the EFF is in support of this Divorce Amendment Bill. We still condemn the destruction of family, unity by the apartheid government of Israel and the capitalist who are killing women and children in the Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC.

This Bill is a step in the right direction in bringing previously excluded groups into the protection given to most by the Constitution.


This Bill as the chairperson said, it emanates from the Constitutional Court judgment in the Women’s Legal Centre Trust vs the President of the Republic of South Africa and Others, which the court ruled that the Divorce Act was unconstitutional to the extent that it failed to recognise Muslim marriages which have not been registered as valid marriages. This judgment is an important judgment in our continuously evolving jurisprudence on the constitutionalisation of customs and religious beliefs. It affects the whole spectrum of rights, including the destruction of assets at the desolation of the Muslim marriages, patrimonial benefits as well as the rights to maintenance of children born of Muslim marriages.



The court rightfully bemoan the exclusion of women and children born out of these marriages. We are in support of the amendment that now ensures that the Muslim marriages would be treated the same as civil marriages. This gives the certainty of judicial supervisions of marriage dissolution proceedings

which women married according to Muslim customs were not provided with.



Hon House Chairperson, the fact that it has taken this long to regulate the rights of couples in Muslim marriages is very concerning. It speaks to the need to have a law general application relating to marriages. While still maintaining the rights and the integrity of customs and those who adhere to specific beliefs and customs.



While appreciating the evolutionary nature of customary law, more specifically it is important to have legislation that prescribes basic minimum standards.


The recognition of Customary Marriages Act may need to be reviewed as well going forward. The ultimate goal must be to ensure that while the institution of marriage is respected, women and children in particular who have been victims of abuse and neglect get the full spectrum of rights available to them. Thank you.



Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon House Chair, this much-needed Bill seeks to fill a vacuum in our marriage laws, particularly when it comes to Muslim marriages. This is a very critical piece of

legislation as currently Muslim women, dependents and minors are not legally provided for in the distribution of assets during the dissolution of a marriage. As one may anticipate, this is a legal flaw in which unprotected individuals can fall prey to the shortcomings of our laws.



The IFP notes that by passing this Bill we will be considering and safeguarding the interest of women, dependents and minors in Muslim marriages. As a country that is rich in diverse cultures, ethnicities and religions, our laws and the subsequent implementation of said laws need to heavily reflect this. Negation of the formal recognition and protection of the dissolution of marriages entered into and concluded under the provisions of Islam denies Muslim individuals their constitutional rights and protection.


This is a step in the right direction in terms of ensuring legislation consistent with the purpose of sections 9, 10, 28 and 34 of the Constitution by guaranteeing Muslim women and their children equal protection in our laws and courts when it comes to issues such as maintenance, guardianship and care.

The adoption and enforcement of this Bill should never be viewed through the lens of an attempt to replace traditional Islamic law. Individuals who do not wish to terminate their

marriage through civil law are at liberty to do so in terms of existing provisions and practices.



The IFP notes with concern that almost three decades into democracy Muslim marriages, as well as the interests of children born into Muslim marriages, are still not recognised or protected. The IFP supports this report. I thank you.



Mr F J MULDER: Hon House Chair, South Africa is a community of communities. This has been the view of the FF Plus since its formation in 1994. The South Africa that we know is not a homogeneous country as is recognised by the coat of arms which says, unity in diversity.


Thirty years since 1994 and still provision has to be made to accommodate the diverse character and nature of linguistic, cultural and language groups of South Africa, and in this instance to include the provision for the dissolution of Muslim marriages.



There is no one-size-fits-all solution for South Africa. More unity will achieve more recognition and by more recognition of minority groups, more recognition should be given to a government to ... [Inaudible.] ... all the minorities of South

Africa. The FF Plus will therefore support the recognition of the amending of the Divorce Bill for Muslim marriages. Thank you, Chair.


Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the ACDP appreciates the very precarious position that faces spouses, dependents and minor children on the dissolution of Muslim marriages. As pointed out in the Constitutional Court case of the Women's Legal Centre Trust court case, the situation is intolerable. This has resulted in the court ordering Parliament to amend the legislation and the Bill before us seeks to do just that by amending the Divorce Act, to insert the definition of a Muslim marriage to provide for the protection and to safeguard the interest of dependents and minor children of a Muslim marriage and to provide for the redistribution of assets on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage, and to provide for the forfeiture of patrimonial benefits of a Muslim marriage, and to provide for matters in connection with that. Very clearly, this is very important and the ACDP supports the Bill, given the precarious situation. However, we do regret that it has taken so long to address the situation. However, better late than never.

Having said that, the ACDP is very clear that South Africa is a shining example of tolerance and understanding of different faiths and beliefs, and this Bill, belated as it is, recognises that fact. However, it is against this background that the violent disruption of a peaceful Christian prayer rally organised by the concerned Christian clergy of the Western Cape in Sea Point on Sunday must be condemned in the strongest possible manner. It must be condemned by all those who embrace tolerance, the right to protest and freedom of expression. As the ACDP, we also condemn all forms of hate speech towards the Jewish community and its schools. This is naked anti-Semitism ... naked anti-Semitism, hon Mandela.

Whilst we may differ starkly on the tragic events in Israel and Gaza, let us be tolerant of the views of those that differ from us. That is the mark of responsible leadership and a maturing democracy. The ACDP will support this Bill, but rest assured that such disruptions will not detract Christians from continuing to pray for the peace of Jerusalem ... we are constrained to do in Psalms. I thank you.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you. The UDM? Sorry, the ATM? Order, hon members. Good? [Interjections.] Hon Masuku, please mute. I’m sorry, hon Herron. Are you speaking?

Mr B N HERRON: Yes, Chair, I was just saying that we support the Bill. Thank you.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Hon House Chair, first of all, the NFP will support the Bill tabled here today. I'm surprised when I hear my hon colleague talking about Christians ... [Interjections.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Shaik Emam, please. Hon Minister Zikalala and hon Masuku, please mute. Proceed, hon member. I'm sorry for that.


Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: I'm surprised when my colleague, hon Swart, talks about Christians, yet there were so many Christians that were massacred and churches burnt, and he never said a single thing about it. Now that's the highest level of hypocrisy that I've seen before. So, don't use religion ... Don't use religion to get votes. Christians, Muslims and Jews have always lived side by side. Don't use that to get votes.



Now, let me just say this again. We talk about divorce in this House. Right now over 10 000 men, women and children have been divorced or separated from their mothers and their fathers for life, for good. They have been massacred by the Zionist state of Israel.

Mr W M THRING: I’m raising a point of order, Chair. I wanted to know whether the hon ... [Inaudible.] ... would take a ... My hand is raised, Chair.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Okay, thank you. Proceed, hon Thring.


Mr W M THRING: I wanted to know whether the hon Shaik Emam would take a question.



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Shaik, will you take a question?


Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Yes, Chairperson, I’ll take the question.




The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Proceed, hon Thring.



Mr W M THRING: Chair, I wanted to know whether the hon Shaik Emam spoke out against the atrocities committed in Lebanon when hundreds of thousands of Christians were murdered, whether Shaik Emam spoke out against the hundreds of thousands of Christians who were massacred by Islamists in Nigeria and other parts of Africa.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): You posed your question. One question, please. Hon Shaik Emam?



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Go into the history of humanity and you will see who is responsible for creating terrorists. I am the one who stood in this House and condemned the burning of churches and things in India but not one member ... [Interjections.] ... of the ACDP said that ... not one member. So, I can say this. I will condemn any atrocity against any human being anywhere in the world, irrespective of what your religion, your race or your gender is.



Now, let me come back to something very important. I want to educate people in this House today. Let me tell you what sharia says. There's also a misinterpretation and ... [Inaudible.] ... of what the issue is when you marry. You know, the holy Quran says that you may marry two, three or four. However, if you cannot treat them equally in every aspect, then you must stick to one. Now, taking an additional wife was only encouraged during the time of war because there were many widows that lived, and in order to give them dignity and protection, and to give them rights and love and respect and to provide for them, that is the reason why that was encouraged. Let me also say that in terms of sharia law, women

are treated absolutely equally. It is the responsibility of the man to provide food, clothing, shelter and respect, even after divorce. Let me give you one more step. It is quoted in the holy Quran that we take the issue of divorce so seriously, that it is stated that it is as if an earthquake has taken place when a man and a woman get divorced. That's how seriously it is taken.



However, we support this Bill because indeed we believe that everyone must be protected. I have seen when many people from different faiths die, children and wives do not get any benefits. They leave many children and many wives around, not protecting them and not ensuring that they benefit from it.

So, the NFP supports this. Thank you very much.




Mr S M JAFTA: Hon Chair, the Divorce Amendment Bill is a sequent to the Constitutional Court judgment in Women's Legal Centre Trust v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others. In that case the court affirmed the rights of married Muslim woman and children born out of Muslim marriages. Under the old Divorce Act, Muslim marriages under civil law were not recognised. This meant these women had no right to approach civil courts for a decree of divorce. The Divorce Act was also problematic in the following respects.

It failed to safeguard the interests of minor or dependent children of Muslim marriages in the same manner as the children of other marriages on the dissolution of the marriage. It failed to provide for the redistribution of assets on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage. It also failed to make provisions for the forfeiture of patrimonial benefits on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage in the same terms as other dissolved marriages.



The differentiation between married Muslim women and women in other civil marriages was unfairly discriminating the Muslim woman. The differentiation mirrored that of a gay man wishing to get marriage. Before the Civil Unions Act, the Marriage Act had placed restrictions on this kind of marriage. As human rights centric society we commend this major legislative shifts.



The Constitutional Court has again intervened in a matter that was pertinently discriminatory to married Muslim women. We support the Bill, hon Chair. Thank you very much.



Mr M NYHONTSO: Hon Chair, the PAC supports the Bill.

Mr M G E HENDRIEKS: Hon House Chair, Al Jama-Ah indicated at the portfolio committee that it did the checks to the final version of the amendments of the Divorce Act. We know that this is as a result of the Constitutional Court, ConCourt, order and this exclusion was based on the nonrecognition of the Muslim’s Nikah certificate, that is, a Muslim marriage of ceremony in court as were Shariah Islamic law. The Nikah certificate could not be used to obtain a valid South African marriage certificate which has the same rights as other South African women enjoy.



Returning to the Nikah certificate, hon House Chair, I have met with the Home Affairs Minister Dr Aaron who confirmed that the first Nikah certificate was presented to the front desk at the Home Affairs department in Cape Town recently. This Nikah certificate is now formally registered, and it fits in the Soth African National Population Register. So, there is no need for amendments in the Divorce Act. I have to state this matter as a Muslim and also as I am in office as a Member of Parliament.



Regarding the amendments as they appear in the latest version of the Divorce Act, we can categorically state that Muslims, religious leaders, Muslim women organisations and children and

groups were not consulted. This concern was also raised by the hon Dr Newhoudt-Druchen. They consulted the Congress of SA Trade Unions, Cosatu. How can Cosatu speak on behalf of the Muslim community. Not a single Muslim was consulted.



While the amended Bill may meet the ConCouhrt judgment, it remains unconstitutional as women from other religious groups such as Hindus and Jews other than Muslim women in religious marriages will still have no access to the divorce court. How can the Minister of Justice mislead this House and present a Bill that will become an Act that will remain unconstitutional? He is making a joke of this House. Al Jama- Ah holds the view that no woman should be left out. Therefore, I call on Parliament, the National Council of Provinces and the Presidency to reject these amendments even if this House approves it. You can’t rewrite out Shariah, you can’t get a judge to replace the decision of all the bodies to annul a divorce or the husband’s right to call a talaq. So, this is a [Inaudible.] not only to the Muslim in South Africa, but to the two billion Muslims all over the world.



The Constitution provides a for reasonable accommodation on matters concerning marriages, and this has been outrightly ignored. These amendments will be despised by every South

African Muslim in South Africa. I am very disappointed that this Bill has been supported by most parties. I don’t think that they have applied their minds properly [Time expired.] Al Jama-Ah rejects this Bill in its entirety and is the waste of costs ... [Time expired.]



Ms W S NEWHOUDT-DRUCHEN: Hon Chairperson, members of the executive, members of the House, Chief Whip and hon members, the ANC rises in support of the Divorce Amendment Bill. Before I continue, I would like the House to know that the Minister has already said it here that we are not amending the Shariah law at all. This is not what we are doing. The Minister made it very clear.


This Bill is as a result of the Constitutional Court judgment in the case of the Women's Legal Centre Trust v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others. The court recognised the need and the importance of the protection of Muslim women and children in a Muslim marriage in the case of a dissolution of a marriage. The court recognise that the nonrecognition of Muslim marriages in civil courts Muslim women had no right to approach the court for a decree of a divorce. The Constitutional Court held that the Divorce Act of 1997 is inconsistent with section 9, section 10, section 28 and

section 34 of the Constitution. In particular it held that section 6, 7(3) and 9(1) of the Divorce Act is unconstitutional as it fails to safeguard the interests of minor or dependent children of a Muslim marriage in the same manner as children of any other marriage on the dissolution of marriage.



The court held that the 1997 Act also fail to provide for the redistribution of assets on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage and fail to make provision for the forfeiture of patrimonial benefits on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage in the same terms as other dissolved marriages.


Concerning the dictates of a democratic society where the human rights are entrenched, the court remarked that there is no justification and a reason why children who are born from a Muslim marriage do not enjoy oversight of section 6 of the Divorce Act which relates to care and maintenance. It went further to say that there is no justification to why children should not be protected by the statutory basis in a marriage or receive any further protection provided in section 12 of the Children's Act as well as section 24 of the Marriage Act.

The Women's Legal Centre Trust, WLCT, case remarked the diversion from the current position that Muslim couples or a marriage within Shariah law can be afforded statutory protection of the South African legal system if it protects the civil marriages and in addition to their marriage under Islamic law which is also registered as a civil marriage.



The purpose of the Divorce Amendment Bill 23 B-22 of 2023, is to ensure that it provide for the protection and the safeguard of the dependents and minor children in a Muslim marriage, to provide equal dissolution of assets in a dissolution of the Muslim marriage as well as to provide for the forfeiture of the patrimonial benefits for a Muslim marriage in matters enjoined to them.



The strategic objective of the ANC is the transformation of our country, united in a nonracial, nonsexist and prosperous society. The question of gender equality as framed by the principle of nonsexism is essential to the ANC’s programme of the national democratic revolution. This Bill is very important for the advancement of women’s rights as well as those of children. It contributes to a more just and equitable society.

I close with the words of the longest serving president of the ANC, president OR Tambo, when he said:



South Africa will never be free as long as women are not free.



Indeed, if we have to judge the liberation of the country, we take note to the extent of where our women are free. The ANC supports the Bill. Thank you, Chairperson.



Motion agreed to.




Report accordingly adopted.






There was no debate.




Mr G MAGWANISHE: Chairperson, can I get just one minute? I was under the impression that you are going to call for ... [Inaudible.] ... [Laughter.] ... Hon House Chairperson,

Ministers and Deputy Ministers, hon members, in Amabhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC and another versus the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and others, the Constitutional Court confirmed that the Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication- related Information Act, 2002 is unconstitutional, to the extent that it fails to provide adequate safeguards to protect the right to privacy, as buttressed by the rights of access to courts, freedom of expression and the media, and legal privilege.



The Constitutional Court suspended the order of unconstitutionality for 36 months so that Parliament could show the constitutional defects, that is by the

3 February 2024. The court granted interim relief, by way of reading-in, of certain provisions to Rica, which provisions apply for the duration of the suspension. Briefly, the Bill seeks to amend Rica to provide for the designation of an independent designated judge; and an independent review judge, as well as for the powers and functions of the review judge; the tenure of the designated judge and the review judges; adequate safeguards where the subject of surveillance is a journalist or a practicing lawyer; post surveillance notifications; adequate safeguards to address the fact that

interception directions are sought ex parte; adequate procedures to ensure that data obtained after the communications are intercepted is managed lawfully and not used or interfered with unlawfully; procedures to be followed for the processing, examining, copying, sharing, disclosing, sorting through, using, storing or destroying of any data; and the safeguarding of data.



The Bill was introduced on the 29 August 2023 and referred to the committee for consideration and report. The committee acknowledges that the Bill addresses the Constitutional Court order in a minimalist fashion. The Bill is intended as an interim measure to address the defect identified by the Constitutional Court within the given time frame and is not a comprehensive reform of Rica. The committee urges the Minister to introduce a Bill that will comprehensively overhaul Rica to achieve the correct balance of rights and interests by the end of January 2025. I now table this report for your kind consideration.


The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the Report be adopted.



Declaration of Vote:

Adv G BREYTENBACH: Hon members, this Bill addresses the Constitutional Court order in a minimalist fashion, falling short of the comprehensive reform of Rica that is required to prevent future abuse, as well as the specific objections raised in submissions received. The committee notes that the Bill is intended as an interim measure to address the defects identified by the Constitutional Court and is not a comprehensive reform of Rica.



The committee was informed that the Department of Justice will develop the necessary legislation and consequently urges the Minister to introduce a Bill that comprehensively overhauls Rica to achieve the correct balance of rights and interest by the end of January 2025. Furthermore, the Committee will include a recommendation addressing the need for comprehensive legislation in its Legacy report for the incoming Committee of the seventh Parliament to prioritise. However, the reality is that this poor incoming committee is due to deal with the comprehensive overall of a comprehensive list of legislative instruments and then the Deputy Minister and the department repressed to provide a timeline, but of course could not do so.

This Bill should not be seen in isolation, but as part of a general approach by the state to continue to surveil its citizens, largely with impunity. We should read this together with the ... [Inaudible.] ... which seemed together create the impression of a sinister doubling down approach on personal freedoms. It’s in considering this, that the refusal of the executive to even consider introducing a public advocate into the ex parte application process should be seen. This could have added another layer of assurance to the public that the state will only apply for permission to monitor their activities and their communications when necessary, and only for as far as necessary, while placing all relevant information before the reviewing judge.



As it has become standard when this government is confronted with a reasonable proposal such as this, the committee was supplied with the research net biased towards an inclusion. The convenience of the state in this government clearly trumps the rights of ordinary people in terms of the worldview of this government. Ironically, if one looks at the international best practise and there are problems with grey listing, those countries who have made the biggest strands in dealing with organised crime and corruption, afford law enforcement agencies strongest powers of surveillance, which is always

accompanied by equally strong safeguards against abuse. Clearly, our government does not have the political will to follow this practise.


Furthermore, this Bill does not deal with other pressing issues, such as the total freedom with which un-Rica?d sim cards, for example, are sold at every corner shop. There is no possibility of regulation or identification. It is these cards

- used daily in ... [Inaudible.] ... organised crime and racketeering - that should be legislated and enjoy the attention of lawmakers. This Bill is a sticking plaster of a massive ... [Inaudible.] ... It fails to address even the most basic personal issues, and all of this is at the expense of South Africans. We cannot support it. I thank you.



Adv B J MKHWEBANE: Chairperson, this Bill is also a product of protracted litigation and we are legislating today because the Constitutional Court found something wrong with legislation that was passed through this House. In the AmaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism and Others v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, the Constitutional Court ruled that The Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication Related Information Act, Rica, was unconstitutional because it failed to provide adequate

safeguards to protect the privacy of individuals. More specifically, the court ruled that Rica was unconstitutional in as far as it failed to provides for safeguards to ensure that a judge designated in terms of section 1 is sufficiently independent provide for notifying the subject of civilians of the fact of her or his civilians as soon as notification can be given without jeopardising the purpose of surveillance after surveillance have been terminated, adequately provides safeguards to address the fact that interception directions are sought and obtained ex parte. Adequately prescribed procedures to ensure that data obtained pursuant to the exception of communication is managed lawfully and is not used or interfered with unlawfully including prescribing procedures to be followed for examining, coping, sharing sorting through using storing or destroying the data and provide adequate safeguards where the subject of surveillance is practising lawyer or journalist. These are fundamental to human freedoms and knowing the depth of abuse of state resources by the ruling party and unamended Act gave those in power unfitted powers to use state resources to keep all of us under surveillance without our knowledge and without the full vetting of the interest of the presiding judge responsible for authorising the surveillance. This was one also of the

findings of the Public Protector in the report issued against SA Revenue Service, Sars.



We are therefore, in support of the provisions in clause 15(a) of the Bill, which provides for an appointment of a designated judge. So, we welcome the checks and balances applied in the appointment of a review judge as well including the functions of that judge. More importantly, we welcome the amendment that will ensure that those doing the surveillance are obligated to inform those who are put under surveillance. However, the provision that authorities must only notify the subject of surveillance only 90 days’ after the surveillance has been done is not enough to provide the kind of protection to privacy needed. The protection the Bill gives to lawyers and journalists in as far as the protection of sources in case of journalist and client information in case of lawyers ought to be extended to a number of other professions, including doctors. We acknowledge the importance of giving the state powers to conduct surveillance to keep the nation safe. We however, know that the ruling party uses this power to spy on opponents and to us this information to eliminate competition. Therefore, we ought to have saviour sanction of this behaviour. Despite these misgivings, we are in support of the Bill. Thank you.

Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon House Chair, the rule of law is supreme in South Africa and the guardian legislation of that supremacy is our Constitution. Enshrined within the chapter 2 Bill of Rights in the Constitution is the right to privacy and as is mentioned in the report as pertest by the rights of access to courts, freedom of expression and the media and legal privilege.



Our Constitutional Court rightfully declared Rica to be unconstitutional to the extent that failed to adequately provide safeguards regarding instances where it could be abused by third parties.


The Rica Amendment Bill before us today seeks to correct the previous legislations in adequacies and threatening safeguards against abuse notable in providing adequate checks and balances where the subject of surveillance is a journalist or a practicing lawyer.



Chairperson, we live in an age of uncharted connectivity, the Internet of things and the worldwide web. There is no such thing as 100% data security and most likely they will never will be.

Open source intelligent analyst and even up armchair computer users can gather a great deal of information about any person of interest just with the few strokes of the keyboard add to this infrequent but not irregular various data breaches by large organisations such as our credit bureau, which condense the private information of millions of South Africans and one can begin to see the enormity of the legislative challenge in keeping with constitutional precept.



The IFP note that there have been several objections that the Bill before us addresses the Constitutional Court order in only a minimal fashion and fall far short of the comprehensive reform that is required to prevent future Bills. All these notwithstanding. The IFP support The Bill and the report.

Thank you, hon House Chair.



Mr F J MULDER: Hon House Chair, the FF Plus is concerned about the uncomfortable large number of clauses that does not comply with the test of our constitutionality and only corrected without court orders. The FF Plus will keep a close eye on the process to be followed in the amendment yet to be made to achieve a comprehensive solution.

The FF Plus will support the report and the interim amendment. Thank you, hon Chair.



Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the ACDP believes that the law for interception of communication by law enforcement agencies remains a crucial tool in the fight against the ever increasing crime in the country. Now as previous speakers indicated, the Constitutional Court whoever stacked down certain of the provisions of the Rica Act with the judge Madlanga asking, is Rica doing enough to reduce the risk of unnecessary intrusions into privacy of people? And the court answered, the question was a resounding no. And the Bill before us seeks to introduce certain safeguards.



But I think it’s also important to highlight what the court said about actual abuses that had taken place. At paragraph 35, the court said, we have before us evidence of use of the power of surveillance. One example is that of two journalists whose phones were trapped by Police Crime Intelligence Division while the order was investigating corruption scandal. They were investigating corruptions scandal in the SA Police Service. In order to obtain interception directions under Rica, the police told the designated judge that the phone numbers to be tapped with those of suspected ATM bombers that

of course was alive. Interception direction was grated on that line. It authorised the real time of interception of calls, text messages and meter data of the journalists. And these facts were undisputed by the respondents.



So, there is a very necessary element of introducing safeguards and this Bill seeks to do by post notification of persons under surveillance 90 days by the designation of not only the independent designated judge but a review judge and the pass of the review judge and other safeguards to protect data.



Now is very important to note that journalists and lawyers falls into a special category. Yes, it could be extended to other categories but it is important when it comes to surveillance because not only to the never be subject to illegitimate surveillance but because of the issues of legal privilege and of course for journalists keeping the identity of the sources of confidential is very necessary. They have journalists played a very key role in exposing state capture and corruption. We as the ACDP, we would like to contribute to that. So, the ACDP support this amendment. We appreciate the interim measure pending a comprehensive review of compliance but it is in terms of the Constitutional ruling and it is

necessary to comply with that Constitutional Court ruling before its deadline. I thank you.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: House Chairperson, the National Freedom Party will support the report tabled here today. However, let me start off by reminding this House, and now that we’re talking about communication, how all communication were cut off in Gaza and in the West Bank. To what extents the Zionist State of Israel went to ensure there was no levels of communication between the people of Gaza and anywhere else in the world. Let me also remind this House that for a very long period of time we were not getting the true story of exactly what was happening in Gaza. We think and some of my colleagues on the left will get brown envelopes every time they go to the Zionist State of Israel, okay? They have been misleading this House into believing that everything was okay. Therefore, what you saw on the 7th of October, we forget what those people have been going through every single day of their life for the last 75 years. However, now that and thanks to media houses like Al Jazeera and others, we are getting a clearer picture of exactly what is going on, and that is why so many Jews, Christian, Muslim and law-abiding people who respect human rights are rising all over the world with over 100 000 the

other day alone in London. Therefore, you can see the value of communication.



This is an ideal example of how for the first time we’re getting a true picture of exactly what’s going on. I think more than ever we need this Bill right now in order to survey, to watch and observe what is going on, because a whole lot you can expect in these countries at the moment, because of the security of this country, I think we need to save a lot of these people here on my left here. You need to be observing them all the time. You need to be checking their cellphones and things because it’s a major problem. There’s communication all the time. There’s money illicit financial flow. They talk about greylisting, and they talk about illicit financial flow, but they are not talking about the hundreds of millions. If you remember day zero, how they were getting R600 million kickback for the water. They lied to everybody in the Western Cape, how they got caught up.



Therefore, these culprits on the left here are colluding with the Zionist State of Israel. I think, Minister, with your surveillance, it is only a matter of time when they’ll be exposed, I promise you. Therefore, make sure your surveillance targets these people. The National Freedom Party will support

this. Indeed, we think that we need it now more than ever. Thank you very much.



Mr M NYHONTSO: Hon House Chair, the PAC supports the Bill.




Ms A RAMOLOBENG: Hon House Chairperson, Chief Whip, members of the executive, members of the House and fellow South Africans, the ANC rises in support of the Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Amendment Bill, Bill 28 of 2023. In the case at hand, the Constitutional Court reflected on the apartheid history of our country ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr M L D Ntombela): Information technology, IT, please assist her out of the platform. It’s too frequent. You may proceed, ma’am.



Ms A RAMOLOBENG: In the case at hand, the Constitutional Court reflected on the apartheid history of our country and how it was characterised by the malicious vision of the privacy of people by the state through searches and seizures, the interception of people’s communications and generally by spying on people and all men or forms. The right to privacy simply did not exist for the majority of those living in our

country. Mindful of our past, the drafters of the Constitution made sure to include the right to privacy in their drafting.



Mr A H M PAPO: [Inaudible.]






MODULASETULO WA NTLO (Rre M L D Ntombela): Ga o utlwagale Ntate. Ga o utlwagale motlhompegi.




You may proceed, hon member.



Ms A RAMOLOBENG: Thank you, House Chair. This entrenched right seeks to ensure that the South African state in the constitutional dispensation never acts like the apartheid state. Undoubtedly, the right to privacy is an important right in South African constitutional democracy. Given the personal nature of the right to privacy, it has argued that the invasion of individuals’ privacy infringes that individuals’ right to dignity. The right to privacy is linked to the right to human dignity. Of this right and in different cases, Ackermann J said that the right to dignity is a cornerstone of our Constitution.

Like all rights as we know, the right to privacy is not absolute, it may be limited in terms of law of general application and has to be balanced with other rights entrenched in the Constitution. The right may be limited by the legitimate interests of others and the public interest. The purpose of surveillance under Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act, Rica, is to investigate and combat serious crime, guarantee national security, maintains public order and thereby ensure the safety of the Republic and its people. It is an open secret that South Africa is plugged by serious and violent crime, which necessitates the adoption of measures such as Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act to detect, investigate and curb serious crimes. It is crucial for the state to ensure the nation ensures that the public is safe and prevents serious crime, unlike what hon Mkhwebane was alluding to.



In the case of AmaBhungane, the Constitutional Court declared sections of Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act as unconstitutional that it fails to: provide safeguards to ensure that a designate charge is sufficiently independent;

adequately notify the subjects of surveillance as soon as notification can be given without jeopardising the purpose of the surveillance and after surveillance has been terminated; adequately provide safeguards for interception directions that are sought and obtained ex parte; adequately prescribed procedures to ensure that data obtained pursuant to surveillance or interception is managed and not used unlawfully, including a lack of procedures for the processing of data; and lastly, provide adequate safeguards where the subject of surveillance is practicing as a lawyer or a journalist.



To give effect to the Constitutional Court judgment, the Bill which is tabled today was drafted by the department and deliberated on by the portfolio committee. Among other issues raised, the Bill seeks to provide for the designation of independent designated and review judges, powers and factions of the review judge and the tenure of designated and review judges. It further provides for procedures to ensure that data obtained pursuant to the interception of communication is managed lawfully and not used or interfered with unlawfully.

The Bill further seeks to provide for procedures to be followed in examining, copying, sharing, sorting through, using storing or destroying the data. Lastly, the Bill

provides for adequate safeguards where the subject of surveillance is practicing journalist or a lawyer.



We have been informed that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development will develop the necessary legislation which will comprehensively overhaul Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication- Related Information Act. A way forward on this matter has been developed by the committee. We urge the Ministry to address this matter with a matter of urgency. The ANC supports the Bill and its report. I thank you.



Motion agreed to.



Report accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance dissenting).






(Second Reading)




There was no debate.



Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance dissenting).




Mr G MAGWANISHE: House Chairperson, Deputy President, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, hon members. When we were growing up we were used to listen to a song by Peter Tosh:



Legalize it.


And I will advertise it. It is good for flu.

It is good for asthma.

It is good for tuberculosis, even thrombosis.

Legalize it.


Don’t criticize it.



It is talking to you, hon Cele.




Indeed, this was a man ahead of his time. We, of course, as Parliament have to balance many considerations, including the negative impact of the abuse.



In 2018 the Prince judgement, the Constitutional Court declared certain provisions in the Drug and Drug Trafficking

and Medicines and Related Substance Control Act unconstitutional as they amount to an impermissible limitation of the rights to privacy.


The order of invalidity was suspended for 24 months for Parliament to correct the constitutional defence. Although the

24 months has been exceeded, there is no gap in the law.




The court provided a read-in provision that ensures that adults will not be guilty of criminal offense if they use, possess or cultivate cannabis for personal consumption in private.


On 1 September 2020 the Cannabis for Private Purposes Bill was introduced and referred to the committee. The Bill was introduced with the intend to address only the Prince judgement, which broadly focussed on considerations relating to the right of privacy, as far as the use of cannabis for adults for private purposes.



However, the committee was called upon by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to extend the scope of the Bill to also accommodate considerations relating to the best interest of the child.

This was to address the 2022 judgement in the Centre for Child Law V the Director of Prosecutions, Johannesburg, which found the processing of children within a criminal justice system in relation to cannabis offenses was unconstitutional.



To accommodate the Centre for Child Law judgement in the Bill, the committee received permission from this House to extend the subject of the Bill to also address issues relating to the best interest of the child.



Due to the complexity of the subject matter, the committee has facilitated extensive public consultation processes and deliberations with numerous stakeholders.


The Bill was presented by the committee propose, among others: Respect for the right to privacy of an adult person to use or possess cannabis.



Regulate the use or possession of cannabis by an adult person.




Provide for an alternative manner to address the issue of prohibited use, possession of, dealing in cannabis by children with due regard to the best interest of the child.

Prohibits the dealing in cannabis and provides for the expungement of the criminal records of persons convicted of possession or the use of cannabis or dealing in cannabis, based on presumptions.



The committee notes that cannabis and Hemp [low transdelta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol, THC, plants or parts of plants of Cannabis sativa L. cultivated for agricultural or industrial purposes] sector is amongst the priority sectors identified by government to secure investment, job creation and support for sustainable and rural livelihoods.



The committee holds that this Bill paves the way as a first step for the development of a legislation to address the regulation of cannabis for commercial purposes.


The use of responsible cannabis for private purposes has been legalized.



Mr Tosh, you can now advertise it.




I now move that this report be considered. Thank you.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr M L D Ntombela): Hon Magwanishe, I thought you’d remind the House by singing the song!



Mr G MAGWANISHE: House Chair, my voice was stolen by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party. [Laughter.]



The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved that the Report be adopted.


Declarations of vote:


Mr J ENGELBRECHT: House Chair and colleagues, this Bill has been drafted to comply with initially one and recently two Constitutional Court judgments. Firstly, the Prince judgement which focuses on youth cultivation and possession of cannabis by adults, as well as the right to privacy; secondly, and more recently the Centre of Child Law judgement which focuses on children apprehended for cannabis offences consideration for the best interest of the child and subsequently ordered that children should be kept out of the criminal justice system.


The DA supports the motivation in both these judgments. Some matters around this Bill needs to be communicated clearly so that there is no misunderstanding. This Bill deals with cannabis that has psychoactive components for personal

consumptions by adults in private only. To buy or sell cannabis remains illegal. It is a serious criminal offence. If prosecuted for this offense the consequences are severe. In layman’s terms, if you want to use it you have to grow it, don’t buy it. The National Road Traffic Act will be amended by this Bill. This means that it would be an offence to be under the influence of cannabis whilst driving.



Again, in layman’s terms, don’t drink and drive will now change to, don’t drink or use weed and drive. Specific regulations referred to within this Bill, like for instance, the amount by weight of cannabis that an individual may possess; the number of plants an individual may grow; how cannabis may be transported; etc, is not contained in this Bill. These regulations are the responsibility of the Minister. Any such regulations must be approved by Parliament after which it would be published in the Government Gazette where this information may be obtained. There are a lot of interests and discussions around the commercialisation of cannabis and the perceived benefits. This could unlock in the economy, likewise around the medicinal use of cannabis for all kinds of ailments.

Neither of these two aspects falls within the scope of this Bill. There would be separate legislation that would regulate this in future. This Bill has been drafted in accordance with the requirement as set out by the Constitutional Court.

Therefore, the DA welcomes and supports this Bill. The DA also supports the expungement of cannabis-related criminal records in as far as it is relevant to this Bill which should come into effect when this legislation is promulgated. Thank you very much.



Adv B J MKHWEBANE: Chairperson, the Cannabis for Private Purposes Bill has come a long way and is one of the Bills that have endured the longest processing in Parliament from 2019

... [Interjections.] ... This House granted the committee a permission to extend the process in relation to the Bill as a result of the committee and legal officer spectacular inability to read the law with understanding. The legal office and this committee knew that the Bill has to address the conditional issues raised in the Prince judgement which declared that the criminalisation of cannabis use for personal and religious purposes was unlawful and unconstitutional.



Following that there was a judgement from a case involving the Centre for Child Law which related to the criminalisation of

children caught in possession of cannabis. The committee then failed to include the consideration from both judgements.

Their failure to appreciate this demonstrates unforgivable incompetence. Chairperson, in general terms we are in support of the Bill and we would have liked the Bill to go further and expand the scope to include a more thorough attempt to free cannabis from the colonial and racist prison it has been confined for centuries. The Bill must amplify the health and other benefits of using cannabis and not simply adhere to the colonial description of cannabis as simply a hallucinogen.



While we support the Bill, we think that the provisions of clause (2) in particular in relation to decriminalisation of use and possession of cannabis, while criminalising the sale of cannabis, counters the purpose of the Bill. We cannot decriminalise use and continue to criminalise the sale and production for sale of this product. I am saying this because






... nina mphakathi wasemaMpondweni ...





 ... in the Eastern Cape who are exclusively dependent on the production and sale of cannabis, it means if government is not making sure that you are supported and you are included in ensuring that the herb is used for the benefit of health, then it means you will be spending time in jail because this criminalises the sale to 10 years’ imprisonment.



We do, however, welcome the expungement of criminal records of people who have been found guilty of the crime of possession of this cannabis because our jails are very much flooded.

Overall, the Bill has failed to free cannabis from the stigma it got from colonialism. It is still extremely limiting and does not provide for economic exploitation of the herb only to the extent that it complies with the Constitutional Court judgements. We are in support of the Bill but we feel that much could be done to deal with cannabis to challenge the economic challenges of this country. Amen.


Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon House Chair, it is ... [Inaudible.] ... knowledge that ... [Inaudible.] ... February 2014, the late Dr Tom Mario Oriani-Ambrosini Member of Parliament, MP, for the IFP, introduced the medical innovation, you know, which principally sought to legalise the use of substances such as cannabis for medicinal purposes only. After Dr Oriani-

Ambrosini’s passing the Bill was reintroduced by the IFP chief whip, Narend Singh, MP. The usage of cannabis for medicinal purposes was eventually agreed upon with the ruling party and the rest, as they say, is history.



The Bill before us today is an area that the 2014 Private Members Bill did not address namely; the use of cannabis for private purposes. The issue of privacy arose from a subsequent Constitutional Court judgement which focused on considerations relating to the right of privacy as far as the use of cannabis by adults for private purposes is concerned. Notably, in September 2022, the Constitutional Court in the Centre for Child Law judgement confirmed the order of the High Court which declared section 4(b) of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act to be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.



To the extended, it criminalises the use and or possession of cannabis by a child. The best interest of children is always being in sacrosanct to the IFP. ... [Inaudible.] ... for commercial purposes is fully supported and is addressed in Dr Oriani-Ambrosini’s 2014 Bill. Thankfully, it has now been identified by the government as one of the 14 priority sectors to secure investment, job creation and provide support for sustainable rural ... [Inaudible.] ... [Time expired.]

Criminalisation and incarceration for holding ... [Inaudible.]


... amounts of cannabis ... [Time expired.] ... The IFP supports the Bill and the Report of the committee. I thank you, hon House Chair.





Mnr F J MULDER: Agb Huisvoorsitter, die VF Plus erken die feit, die handigheid en die sin om die gebruik van marijuana vir medisinale doeleindes wel verder te navors en dat die wetgewing daarvoor aangepas word.




... also, House Chair, the Bill introduces several important provisions contributing to South Africa’s development project which we support, including the repeal of cannabis inclusion of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act, the lifting of tetrahydrocannabinol, THC, limits, for instance, the 2%, improved differential clarity on the waving out liability on healthcare, professionals for cannabis prescriptions, but regrettably, House Chair, for ever progressive element of the Bill, there is an equally outstanding shortcoming that limits its usefulness. The FF Plus is concerned that the policy draft has struggled to develop cannabis laws that are sensible, empirical, forward looking and fit for a purpose.



Die VF Plus ondersteun nie die gebruik van cannabis vir privaatgebruik en spesifiek dan ... [Onhoorbaar.] Dit is alles

... [Tussenwerpsels.]






The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr M L D Ntombela): IT, please assist hon Mpumza out. Please proceed hon member.




Mnr F J MULDER: Die VF Plus voel ongemaklik daarmee dat die privaatgebruik van cannabis en die wetgewing wat dan nou spesifiek ingestel is in gevolge hierdie wetswysiging wat dit beheer onvoldoende is om oortredings in hierdie verband hok te slaan. Die is ’n gemeensaak dat persone wat ’n oormaat alkohol inneem of enigsins alkohol inneem nie almal dieselfde reageer nie en dat dit noodwendig ook die geval gaan wees met die gebruik van cannabis. Ons weet dat die gebruik van cannabis mense se gedrag aantas en dat ’n persoon wat ’n oormaat daarvan privaat gebruik het dan ’n gevaar vir ander motoriste op die paaie kan wees. Daarom sal die VF Plus nie die wet of die verslag in sy huidig vorm ondersteun nie. Dankie, Voorsitter.

Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the CDP is on record as expressing our deep concerns about this bill, which was followed, admittedly, by the Constitutional Court in the Prince judgment. So, the legislature was compelled to follow that judgment. However, we believe that cannabis abuse has a devastating impact on our communities, particularly, when they are mixed with Mandrax and other drugs and that this was not sufficiently addressed by the court. Now, during the public hearings, the Department of Health stated that allowing cannabis for private use is likely to lead to an increased use of cannabis by adolescence, due to the more open use, and therefore, great exposure.



Adolescents who are regular smokers of cannabis are at risk of having arrested psychological development, and there’s also growing concern, this is the Department of Health, about the long-term effects of regular cannabis use on adolescent brain development. Brain development continues until the age of 25, so, there’s a concern for young people in emerging adulthood. We also know that there are some short-term effects in terms of cognitive functioning and memory, based on the research conducted in Cape Town. The Medical Research Council said there will be likely to be an increase in demand for mental health and substance abuse treatment following this Bill.

They said local researchers highlighted the burden of cannabis induced psychosis on under resourced psychiatric services in the KwaZulu-Natal, the Eastern Cape and the Western Cape, and these services are already chronically under resourced and are unlikely to cope with the increased demand. So, Chair, there are some very negative impacts that were set out by departments when we considered this Bill. However, at the same time, there are some very positive aspects when it comes to low THC when it comes to the benefits of hemp and medicinal cannabis as the other speakers have indicated. There are obviously economic benefits to the commercialisation of hemp and medicinal cannabis, which need to be considered.



The hoemp is a low hanging fruit and is the first step in broadening regulation. Now this is low THC, and this is nonpsychotic. Then of course, diseases and ailments can be treated with cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol, THC, cannabidiol, CBD, chronic pain, asthma has been found to be very useful.

The Certified Dementia Practitioner, CDP, would have preferred an approach of restorative justice, and we are fully mindful of people that might be in possession of five grams being arrested, and then held overnight or long periods of imprisonment where they were raped and abused into a lifetime

of crime. However, that was found by the Constitutional Court to be unacceptable.



So, while the ACP appreciates this Bill, it is a direct response to a Constitutional Court judgment, and we did everything to assist in limiting the damage done, regrettably, we will not be supporting it. I thank you.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: House Chairperson, the NFP will support the report and the Bill tabled here today. However, let me educate this House on something that they’ve never heard of before.

When you talk about apartheid, you talk about forced removals, theft of your land, your human rights violation, but certainly, I don’t think any of you in this House heard of weed apartheid. Nobody has heard of the word weed apartheid.

Now, this is what is practiced in Palestine on the West Bank by the Israelis.


I want you to listen to this, when an Israeli is caught with cannabis, Chairperson, they get a fine, but when a Palestinian is caught with cannabis on the same land, they have to face a military court. Now, that is what you call weed apartheid.

That’s what is happening in Palestine under their own land. They would be ruled by the Zionist state of Israel supported

by some of my friends, not all, some of my friends on the side, on the extreme left, of course, yes. Now my concern, Chairperson, on cannabis, and I know that it does have a major impact on the economy, it will grow the agricultural sector and it will create jobs. However, my problem is that South Africa is facing a serious crisis like many parts of the world on drug addiction.



You know, our Minister of Police is sitting here, and he knows what it is like, you know? Do we have the capacity to be able to address this? Yes, there is no doubt about it, it’s been proven without doubt for medicinal purposes it’s actually very, very good. I always say that when the Almighty God created human, he created everything for you, He gave every country something different, He gave you different plants and He gave you different things so you can look after yourself, however, if abused, of course, you know what the results will be. Now, in this case, my concern is on cannabis, what would happen if there’s going to be large levels of addiction to it, and that is going to put in more pressure already on the social development sector that we have and on the rehabilitation centres that we have? Are we going to be able to cope?

So, we need to be mindful. While we are supporting this, on the one hand, it’s job creation. It’s exactly the same thing with taverns and shebeens. We’re supporting it, we’re giving it licenses to operate 24 hours, but look at the negative impact on what happens because of the use of that alcohol. So, it's exactly the same thing that we have to be very careful on cannabis. I don't know how many people are going to come to this House after ... that’s my concern. So, I think we need to be mindful, but the NFP will support this, but of course we’re saying, let's put measures in place to counter the effects of addiction. Thank you very much.



Mr M NYHONTSO: Hon Chair, the PAC supports the Bill.



Ms N H MASEKO-JELE: House Chair, members of the National Assembly, fellow South Africans, in the case of Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and others versus Prince 2018, the Constitutional Court unanimously declared the following sections of the Drug Act unconstitutional and invalid, section 4(b) section 5(b) including section 22, capital A (9) subsection A and I for the Medicine Act. The Constitutional Court held these statutory provisions to be constitutionally invalid, to the extent indicated, because

they’ve infringed the right to privacy and entrenched in section 14 of the Constitution.



The Constitutional Court dispensed with the high court’s limitation of its order to the use, cultivation or possession of cannabis at home or in private in a private dwelling. It helps that right to privacy extends beyond the boundaries of a home. The effect of the judgement is in two-fold, Chairperson, it decriminalises the use or possession of cannabis by an adult in private, for that adult person’s personal consumption in private, and also it decriminalises the cultivation of cannabis by an adult in a private place for that adult personal consumption in private. However, the use or position of cannabis by a child anywhere, or by an adult in public, is not decriminalised.



The bill as initially tabled and deliberated on by the portfolio committee, did not look beyond the adult-centre focus. To consider the best interest of children found in possession of cannabis and possessed a process, and as such, did not consider cannabis related issues in relation to children within the criminal justice system. In the case of centre for child law versus Director of Public Prosecutions, Johannesburg and others, the court made the following remarks.

Children are precious members of our society, and any law that affects them, must have due regard to their vulnerability and their need for guidance.


We have a duty to ensure that they receive the support and assistance that is necessary for their positive growth and development. Considering section 28, subsection 2 of the Constitution, which states that a child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child. The court then posed the question which is, is it in the best interest of the child to continue to criminalise the use and or position of cannabis by a child? The court went on to say, it is impossible to claim that a child has a right to the personal consumption of cannabis in private. There are valid reasons to protect children from the use of drugs. This matter is about the consequences of use and of position of cannabis by a child.



Our focus in this matter is on the decriminalisation, not legalisation. It is about choosing the appropriate manner in which to respond to a child using and or possessing cannabis. The focus of the Prince judgement was the right to privacy and that of centre for child law judgment, was the best interest of the child and that these two cannabis related judgments,

were not to be simultaneously considered for legislative processing purposes, due to the different differing areas of focus. Initially, deliberations and public submissions were limited to the Prince judgement contests and considerations only, accommodate the centre for child law judgment in the Bill.



The committee requested the House for permission to extend the scope of the Bill and call for the public comment to ensure compliance with all procedural requirements in the processing of the Bill. This was done in line with the dictates of the Constitution. The committee facilitated meaningful public participation. It has been a long journey since the Prince judgment was first handed down. We wish to thank everyone who contributed to the development of the Bill. The ANC supports the Bill. I thank you.



Question put.




Motion agreed to.



Report accordingly adopted.




[Take in from Minutes.]





Question put.



Bill read the second time.




Agreed to




JUNE 2023)




The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, hon members...



IsiXhosa: 1

... hayi ndiza kuzithethela namhlanje.






Let me start by thanking the disciplined of multi-party delegation that I led to Ireland and Kenya. The Chief Whip’s forum took a decision in November 2022 to undertake benchmarking study visits to the Parliaments of Ireland and Kenya. The decision was informed by observations that the

political landscape in South Africa was changing, which manifests itself, amongst others, the emergence of coalition governments in local government sphere.




Endaweni yokungavani kakuhle ...






... and the recent electoral reforms enacted by Parliament following Constitutional Court order to allow independent candidates to stand for elections in national and provincial government. In deciding on which countries to visit, the forum noted that in Ireland and in Kenya they have had coalition governments for decades. That they would provide valuable lessons with respect to the formation of coalition government and how to stabilize them, as well as the phenomenon of independent candidates, something that is going to be new at our level at the national and provincial government.



The decision was also informed by the realization that Parliament was in a continuous state of development and that we should seek ways and means to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the of their work as the Whippery, because Whippery is responsible for the smooth running of Parliament.

The purpose of the study visit was amongst others, to experience the establishing and stabilizing of collision governments, the phenomenon of independent candidates and Members of Parliament who are not affiliated to any existing political party, the nature of the electoral system and how it caters for independent candidates, the structure of programming of the business of Parliament, how Parliament exercises its oversight over president, the committee system and how it is capacitated.



Our observation in Ireland, was that the expectation of a single majority government came to an end in the 1980s.

Coalitions became the norm and faced many challenges, but somehow managed to survive. Over the years, most coalition government completed their full term, including the minority government, in 2016 to 2020, because those coalition government are regulated.


In Kenya, since 2002, political parties that were serious about winning a national election or referendum and hoping to form a government had no option other than to make a broad- based electoral pact, pre-election coalition and form parliamentary and governmental coalition.



Le nto ibiqalwa ngaba besithi yiMoonshot okanye Moon Something.




With the adoption of the new Constitution in 2010, the constitutional and legal framework underpinning coalition formation in Kenya was enacted. So, the issue of a coalition in Kenya is enacted through the Constitution, the rules and procedures of coalition policies as well as election rules for coalition and nomination rules and procedures. The delegation observed that in Kenya, coalition government agreements are regulated by law and provide more structured approach, whilst in Ireland they are not that regulated but they are formed in terms of agreements reached among the parties.



Electoral system...






... angafika unyaka wama-2024 kodwa uza kuphinda adlule, nitsho minyaka le.




Considering that South African Parliament resolved when it passes the Electoral Amendment Act of 2023 to revisit the matter of electoral system. The electoral system of the two countries could be studied as part of a broader comparative research. Ireland electoral system is based on proportional representation in a multi seat constituency, with each voter having a single transferable vote. Something that is a little bit crazy. You vote and we transfer your vote. While in Kenya, they follow the first part of the post electoral constituency system. Both electoral systems have advantages and disadvantages that can be looked at with a view of informing the South African electoral system and process. It is our view as the delegation that South Africa must start debating this matter of electoral system because the current electoral system is not really assisting us.



The oversight of Prime Minister and Ministers in Ireland and the president in Kenya. The Parliament of Ireland does not have a specific committee that oversees the head of government.





Nivile, ngapha kweli cala? Le nto niyifunayo, ayikho ke kule ndawo besiye kuyo.



The mechanism to hold the Prime Minister accountable is through the question session. The Prime Minister answers questions twice in a week on a Tuesday and a Wednesday for 45 minutes.




Thina sininika iiyure ezintathu apha.





For ministers, one hour and 45 minutes is set aside on Tuesday and Wednesdays for them to answer questions. A further hour and 20 minutes set aside for Thursday for parliamentary questions amongst members.



In Kenya, no provision is made whatsoever for a dedicated committee to oversee the Office of the President, the President does not account to Parliament...




... nivile?





The NA however, is required to ensure that the President satisfies the Constitution in making appointments such as requirements of standards – there is something that you are going to like out of Kenya that you have been looking for. Cabinet appointments...




... mamela wena.





The delegation noted that unlike in South Africa, Kenyan members of the Cabinet are nominated by the president for approval by the NA. Once approved by the NA, the president appoints them in his Cabinet and those members resign as MP’s after they have been nominated to serve in Cabinet.



In Kenya, Members of Parliament are represented in salaries and remuneration commission.




Abacingelwa ngabanye abantu...





... because this legislative arm is taken seriously in other countries, not treated as a stepchild like it is happening with us. Therefore, when it comes to the dress code...




... beningazungena ke kweli cala. Kutshiwo phaya ukuba sincede sangezi nani kuba beningazukungena phaya.




The delegation noted that dress code that contrasted sharply in these two Parliaments. in Ireland, members were dressed casually. Very informal in Chamber. Came...





... berhuqa izihlangu...






... with shorts and jeans...





... ningalunga nina phaya...





... however, in Kenya, the dress code was formal. Members of Parliament, members of the media and guests are required to dress properly. They have a rule. Rule 9 of the NA Rules, prescribes that proper dress for men is the coat with collar, tie long sleeve shirt, long trouser, socks and shock and the shoes.





Hayi, enye into ayibizwanga phaya. In respect of ladies, it means, listen ladies, it means business-like suits, formal, smart-casual wear, skirts and dresses should be below the knee length and be decent. Sleeveless blouses are prohibited.

Recommendation. There is a project of scholarship between Ireland and South Africa, but South Africa is not responsive to that. We have been given allocation of 200 young people to go and study in Ireland but the Department of Higher Education and Training has not fulfilled this commitment. We are recommending that this portfolio committee and the International Relations and Co-operations must ensure that they fulfil this.



Digitizing the committee system in Ireland at the committee level. The paper-based recording of attendance, voting and changes are done properly. The delegation observed that when

voting takes place in committee meetings, the results are displayed on a screen in the committee rooms in real time, making the process more transparent for members of the public. Also, they do conduct public hearings online to avoid members going up and down. At times you find that there are no communities for public hearings. We recommend that our Parliament look at this this technological advancement in the committee as it is very much important.



Induction of members upon they are taking office after swearing in in Kenya. After you've been sworn in, by the time you get out of that door, you have a car that is waiting for you with a driver. That is a government car for five years.

For five years, and the reason for that is for you to be able to focus on your work and not to focus on driving and nobody wishes to go to the Executive because you have your car, you have a driver for you to do your work. We are recommending that, let that be adopted here.




Sonke sifakwe phaya, mhle la mcimbi kwaye uphucukile.





In terms of salary, members get salary, not these peanuts that you are getting here. They get the proper salary and House- Sitting Allowance every time you sit in a committee you sit in Parliament.





Aba bangaziyo ePalamente hayi bebeza kuba ngamahlwempu phaya.





Everybody comes to Parliament because...





... ukuza ePalamente ikhona into encumisayo oyifumanayo. Hayi, akusetyenzwa njee simahla njengokuba sisenza nje apha.




Each new member gets a dedicated media liaising officer to take you through all parliamentary processes on how to interact with the media. Constituency work. No caucus funds are used to do your constituency. Parliament takes care of constituency work. Each member has two offices, that is, your constituency office and your constituency development office. You become your own Minister and Prime Minister in your own constituency. When the community wants a school, they tell

you, you get allocated funds for a school and you are given engineers, consultants and everybody else to deal with that and you deliver. We are saying that Parliament of South Africa changing the electoral system also adopts this.





Iya kusibeka endaweni ebanzi.





All petitions can be submitted via post or mail, but when those petitions are addressed, standing orders entitle anyone to submit a petition except Members of Parliament. These ones who go and mobilize petitionS...





... anivunyelwanga phaya kuba abahlali kufuneka bazifakele.





As I am about to finish, legislative arm is treated as a legislative arm. Parliament is parliament. We have given all the respect, but out of our own observations, we also taught them a lot.




Soze uyiphinde le nto uyithethayo.






Hon Mabena...






Asokuze uyiphinde. Yena kanye lo ohloniphekileyo uMabena, akasokuze aphinde kodwa.




The delegation recommends that guidelines for petitions be developed in our country to assist members of the public ...




... mayingawi le nto kuba kungabonakala ingathi andiyixhasi. Kufuneka ime ihlale icacile oko.




We are recommending that let us constitute a petition unit that will assist the NA. Hon members, we are hereby tabling this report to say that let the good things that are in this report be considered and implemented...




... ukuze sibone amaLungu ePalamente ehlonipheka kwiindawo zawo...




... because when you go to your constituency, it will demand a road, school, water or a bridge when you do not have means to do that. Let members be funded in accordance to their constituency. Thank you very much House Chair.



Question put.



The HOUSE CHAIRPERON (Mr M L D Ntombela): Hon members, I ought to have called the Chief Whip of the Opposition Party. I was bidding for some time for this juicy report, hon members.



The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: House Chair, I hope you do not make a habit of forgetting the Chief Whip of the official opposition. Study tours in a financially constrained environment may instinctively be disregarded as a junket with very little value to ordinary South Africans. Perhaps, the remedy for that is to ensure that there are clear objectives for the benchmarking exercise, there are topics of collaboration and practices with learning from and an ability to decipher those that will work in a South African context

and those that would not. Most importantly, the learnings from such a tour should be taken forward and implemented when necessary.


The idea behind these study tours is to find international best practice that can be applied here at home because ultimately the aim is to improve the lives of South Africans in the work that we do here. In the two countries that we undertook the study tour to, Ireland and Kenya, plenty was learnt and can be implemented back home so that we can strengthen the way in which our Parliament works. This is especially important as we are collating and producing the Seventh Parliament legacy report.



For instance, in Ireland, it was important to study their accountability mechanisms in their Parliament. In the era of the Zondo Commission Report on state capture where the South African Parliament was found wanting in many instances of effective oversight, it was important to learn how other parliaments grapple with the tension between the executive and the legislature in so far as accountability is concerned. This is not just an academic exercise. It helps to strengthen our own Parliament accountability mechanisms.

In the Irish Parliament, the Prime Minister responds to questions from its members twice a week. It means that he is able to account for his government at a very close range and in high frequency. It was useful to note that while, as a Chief Whip of the Majority has indicated, there is no committee that oversees the presidency but the frequency of the presence of the Prime Minister in the House, surely, makes up for the fact that in South Africa we only have a President that accounts to the House once a quarter and there is no committee that oversees the entire presidency which has become incredibly bloated over the years. That is why the Rules Committee must proceed with its work to establish this committee overseeing the presidency in our in in our South African context. Ultimately, transparency should be the norm and not the exception.



So, how do we use the excellent examples of transparency and accountability in the South African context? We can also learn to ensure that members of the executive when they are asked questions in the House, they respond satisfactorily. It is simply not good enough that Ministers in this Cabinet do not have a basic measure and an objective standard of what is a requisite response to a question. This matter must also go to the Rules Committee in the next Parliament where there is an

objective rubric of what is acceptable as a response to a member who is asking a question on behalf of the public. It must be answered with accuracy and willingness to accept the feedback. This starts from the President all the way down to his Cabinet.



Currently, some of the Ministers in the Cabinet are flying by the seat of their pants and hardly ever respond to questions that are asked. Crucially, in Ireland, we also observed a country that has been engaged in coalition politics for decades. While the coalition agreements are not codified, they are essentially a loose political agreement, but they last.

They are underscored by immense political maturity and the compromise for the sake of their voters and for the sake of their citizens. These coalitions agreements and arrangements are fluid enough to be pragmatic, however, they are solid enough to be able to deliver against the government’s programme of action. In a nutshell, they work. In the modern political dispensation in Ireland, it has been characterised by coalition governments that have stability and that can serve people. That is something that the South Africans can learn.

In Kenya, closer to home, coalition governments are legislated for, which is what the DA has been arguing for. They are practically managed by a political registrar and the legal framework guides the country’s complex politics that is often divided along tribal lines. We can learn from both of these countries. We should inject our politics with the maturity of the Irish model and the thoroughness of the Kenyan model. This trip has impressed upon us why we need to - despite our political differences in this House - agree that coalition governments are here to stay and we need to be able to provide a legal framework for them. Whether we agree about a moonshot

... [Inaudible.] ... or the multiparty charter, the reality is that coalition politics have become a reality of South African politics.



As a Parliament we need to take the lead in terms of ensuring that there is a framework in which they can essentially operate. That is why the DA brought three pieces of legislation before this House that would seek to stabilise coalition governments. We know that we are likely to see a national coalition government as the ANC loses its grip on national support across the country. We are likely to see hung legislatures across various provinces. So, we need to make

sure that Parliament leads the process of readying the country for these eventualities. We cannot behave ...




... ingathi uhambo lusothusile kodwa kudala sisazi ukuba kuyiwa kunyulo kunyaka ozayo.




We do implore the House to support these Bills when they come and served before it for a decision. Let us leave a legacy as this Parliament that we can be proud of. Let us leave Parliament and the South African political system better than when we found it. Let the lessons learnt during these benchmarking exercises inform our own lawmaking process. Thank you.




Mnu E MTHETHWA: Kuyabonakala futhi kuyacaca ukuthi niyilabo abathi uma bebona umuntu egqoke ibheshu e-Mall nimthumele ngamaphoyisa. Hhayi, kulungile.





House Chair, the EFF took a conscious decision not to be part of the Chief Whips’ Forum on benchmarking study visit to

Ireland and Kenya. We communicated our decision. We have made it clear that the so-called benchmarking exercise are nothing but holiday trips disguised as benchmarking study visits. This is done by the majority of committees in Parliament.



We live in a world of advanced technology where information and expertise can be assessed without the need for extravagant and costly trips that have become an annual tradition. The claim that it is necessary to learn how to better manage the caucus, it is not credible. It is a wasteful and unnecessary expenditure while essential services in Parliament such as the language services are underfunded. Today, the only well capacitated section of language services are English and Afrikaans, as if they are the only languages in South Africa.



We still do not have the Bills Office that can provide dependable support for Members of Parliament to develop Private Members Bill or Bills. We have been raising these issues in the Chief Whips Forum and have called on Parliament to capacitate the Bills Office and nothing has been done.

Nevertheless, people are spending Parliament money to undertake extravagant trips. What is worse is the fact that even the report that is being Tabled at the National Assembly

as we speak, will not have a material impact on the work of this Parliament.



The EFF maintains that there are far more cost effective and efficient ways to engage with international counterparts and conduct necessary research, not extravagant trips for people to take holidays. The Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture has never gone for site visits and it is primarily because there is no budget but you can spend money to go and visit other countries, which is a very critical component of oversight ... [Interjections.] ... no, the Chairperson told me that since they have been there they have never had.


Secondly, Chair ... [Interjections.] ... it means the Fourth Industrial Revolution, 4IR, does not exist in this country because we have so many doctors and professors in the EFF who have passed their exams without having gone to countries to do their research. They have done their research through the accessible means of information technology, IT, systems that are available for everyone to have access to. With that Chairperson, the EFF rejects the Report with its entirety.

Thank you.

Ms Z MAJOZI: Hon House Chair, although I was unfortunately unable to attend the benchmarking study tour visit to the Parliaments of Ireland and Kenya, this does not negate the importance thereof, especially as we are about to enter the era and unchartered waters of coalition governments in South Africa. It was therefore rightfully decided by the Chief Whips Forum that due to the decades long standing coalition governments in each of these countries, that we could learn a great deal from them from a coalition government as well as a Whippery perspective.



Besides the objectives stated above, engagements were also held on how Parliament exercises oversight of the executives. How portfolio committees are capacitated in support provided to members to carry out their parliamentary and constituents work. The IFP support the recommendation that Parliament and its members remain technologically adept, as this will ease the flow of communication and information sharing not only, amongst us but also in respect to our interactions with the public at large, as we are first and foremost a transparent and participatory democracy.



Were further agree that additional assistance be provided to new Members of Parliament in respect of both parliamentary

induction and information and communications technology, ICT assistance as such, will ensure there is a seamless transition between Parliaments. Regarding petitions, we wholeheartedly agree that guidelines for petition be developed with a view to assisting members of the public on what constitutes a petition and how to submit a petition to the Assembly. Such guidelines will also assist in ensuring that the Assembly receives and processes petitions for which the House has the power to act on.



In conclusion such interparliamentary visit by the Chief Whips Forum to other Parliaments provides significant importance in benchmarking the best practices as well as the fostering collaboration, understanding and co-operation between Parliaments. Such visits allow face to face engagement and enhances diplomatic ties between nations in some global parliamentary democracy and is strengthened through shared experiences and lessons learnt. The IFP supports the report Thank you.


Mr S N SWART: Chairperson the ACDP wishes to thank the Chief Whip of the ANC for the professional manner in which she led the delegation to Ireland and Kenya non-partisan way. I also commend you for your patience and forbearance when we were not

treated with the due respect. Here and there, people were late, and we had a really - it was a hard-working time. It was a lot of hard work. And if I was to ask the Chief Whip about some of our experiences, she would share with you about the one-eyed chauffeur that she was very concerned about. [Laughter]



But it is very important for you to meet one on one. With the delegation, we went from one committee to one committee and staff members in Ireland. I think what was particularly encouraging in Ireland was the Fianna Fáil, the Fine Gael party and the Green party. These parties were at war with each other in the 1920s. They were warring parties and they are in a coalition government together. It just shows that people and parties that starkly differ can find common ground when they put the national good of the citizens ahead of them.



What is very interesting in Ireland was that we taught them about hybrid sittings. They do not have any hybrid sittings there, even during lockdown. They were very interested to hear how we have hybrid sittings. So, it was an exchange of ideas. We learnt a lot, but we were also able to teach Ireland and it was same to be in Kenya.

Now Kenya, I always enjoy going to Kenya. We are treated royally in Kenya. I always enjoy the former Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, NCOP and now ambassador His Excellency Mr Mahlangu a good friend of mine, it was wonderful to see him again. But what is interesting is the formation of coalitions in Kenya is before the elections, and it is now determined by the Political Parties Act whether they have to set up coalitions because of the diverse interests.



That is very closely regulated. Coalition governments are very closely regulated. I think as the Chief Whip has said is very important for us to start looking at electoral reform, dealing with independence, dealing with coalitions. I think we as parliamentarians should be concerned that the Electoral Reform Consultation Panel that should have been set up in terms of the Amendment Act that we passed recently in April this year, should have been set up by the 19th of October and that still has not yet been set up. I think we need to follow up on why the Executive has not set up that panel yet.



Chairperson, I think the Chief Whip has alluded to the constituencies in Kenya and they get up to R1,8 million to build schools, bridges. So, you are elected to a constituency, but you are funded to provide services, and that is a very

beneficial aspect as well. I think in general; it was a learning curve. We worked very hard. We taught and we learnt a lot from both Parliaments and I fully support the report.

Thank you, Chief Whip.




Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Hon House Chair, with all the stress you go through with politics, sometimes when you hear some of our colleagues speak, it brings the humour out in you, you know.

But I heard my colleague from the EFF talking about technology. Then maybe what you should do is stay at home and go on the virtual platform, save the money you’re paying for the house, save the airfares of the taxpayers’ money. Why not? But then what is it that you talking about, that is not beneficial on this tour, but your members went to Brazil and everywhere else? That’s hypocrisy, real hypocrisy, let’s be honest about that.



I can say this without any doubt that going to Ireland and Kenya, I learnt something. Something that I’ve been raising in this House regularly. That is when we wanted to know about procurement, employment and appointment. We learnt something very important. They said they have absolutely nothing to do with appointments or employment of anybody. There is an

independent body that is appointed to deal with the issue of employment or appointment of officials, so it’s complete.



The second thing is when we ask them about procurement, something that we’ve been raising here again. They said very clearly, no we don’t know anything about procurement, other than the money that is given to them for development in their constituencies which comes directly from Parliament. So, we’ve learnt a lot from them. I haven’t learned anything from you guys, nothing to be honest with you, nothing. But anyway, alright.



So, well for you my friend, I want to say and another good thing about Ireland is that I met people who think like us and who behave like us. And what did they say? There are some of those that we met that condemned, criticised and took decisions. And there’s one coming next week, and that one is to expel. The Irish government is planning to expel the Israeli ambassador next week. These are the kinds of calibre of people we met.



Whereas we’ve got this hon member here because of those shekeles that he gets from Israel, he forgot his principles, forget ethics, forget his morals, forgets his values, forgets

everything. His life depends on that money. If he doesn’t take it, he’s got no life after that. That’s what it is all about.



So, let me be very honest to you, the NFP supports this. I think it was very beneficial. But what is important is for us to implement these things. And I do agree you pay peanuts; you get monkeys to do the job. Let’s pay people. Let’s pay them well. Let them benefit well, so you also deter them from corruption. Corruption like you have in the Western Cape with this member here who is so - you know, you can see he is restless with guilt. That’s basically what it is about. The NFP supports this report, and we indeed believe that when we want to do these things in future, let’s do them at the beginning of the term. Thank you very much.



Mr M NYHONTSO: Hon Chair, the PAC supports this report of the Chief Whip ...




... noxa nindishiya nje xa nisiya kwezi ndawo zenu. Ndiyayixhasa.




USIHLALO WENDLU (Nk M G Boroto): Umamzo wase-Kenya wakwa- Gwarube.




House Chairperson, Chief Whip of the Majority Party, for having led us so well on this trip, members of the executive that are here, Members of Parliament and fellow South Africans, as South Africa we pride ourselves in that in this Parliament there are many things that we can teach others. As the hon Mthethwa was saying this is a waste of money, hon member, I agree with hon Shaik Emam, eye-to-eye engagements, that is what we call parliamentary diplomacy and it is necessary that we do that, and maybe let us not hear your members going to other countries to speak because that’s what we don’t want. That is a waste of money. You can always take your gadget and speak.



Our visit to Ireland and Kenya yielded a great deal of similarities but also imbued confidence in our democracy. It confirmed a lot of things we are trying to do as the Parliament of South Africa. Whilst many things are similar, there are areas from which our Parliament can learn and improve the way we conduct our parliamentary matters.

Let me just take, for instance, I think members have already spoken on some ... In Ireland, they have what they call a business committee, in which case here at home we call it programming, the functions are almost similar, but there is one exception that we realised there, in that the agenda for the House is put for agreement by the House first and allows for urgent matters to be scheduled. That arose from the previous committee business that they decide in the House that those things can be scheduled.



A further innovation is that allows for a specific day to vote on all matters that require decisions, unlike with us ... we are here now, on Tuesday we have these Bills, on Thursday we have these Bills. They have specific days that you go there only to concentrate on passing all those Bills that they have. Another interesting element is that the rules allow for time for the government and time for the opposition, and in this arrangement, the government can determine which matters are scheduled and in which order. Well, the party time is also apportioned on a proportional basis, much like the Parliament of South Africa. One thing that has been spoken to is the way that even during COVID-19, because their constitution does not allow them to sit at home and attend through hybrid, they had to go to work and do the work, and in Ireland, for instance,

those members in Ireland do not work full time. So they go to work, they do everything and then only around 4 o’clock until late at night at 22:00 they leave because they have other work to do. That could also assist but when we explained our hybrid sessions that we have and how it has helped us during COVID- 19, they appreciated it and they were thinking of just changing their constitution to allow this.



On legislation, the Irish Constitution assigns to the Parliament exclusive lawmaking powers and Bills are considered by both Houses as we do before being sent to the President for assent. The President may refer a Bill to a Supreme Court for confirmation of constitutional compliance before signing. Not that she signs and then there are people taken to court and then the Bill is returned and we have to work on it. Before signing, the President may refer it for compliance, but this procedure is hardly ever used as once ruled upon ... If the court can rule on the Bill, no one can challenge it again in court. So that is how they work on their Bills. What we were able to gather is that there's very little time for committees to deliberate on their own on the pills that they have in the House. That is one limitation that we saw there. Members may petition the President not to sign the Bill on the grounds that it requires public approval. Remember this constituency-

based representation is what they use. So if my constituency feels that, no, this Bill needs the public's approval, not just the public hearings that we have as we move around, but it's different to us, the President may then decline to sign the Bill until a referendum is held to approve that Bill. That is a little bit of where we differ.



While the legislative agenda is dominated by the government, there has been an increase in Private Member’s Bills, but noteworthy is that over the past 10 years, only 22 Private Member’s Bills were enacted. This achievement was due to the concession of the coalition government with independents who had single issues emanating from their constituencies.



The other issue that I can support you on, Mr Mthethwa, is when you say capacitating, the Bills Office should be able to capacitate members on how to write their Private Member’s Bill. That is what we also take with us that that office must be capacitated so that it helps the members. When we go outside, we are called lawmakers. So when we come in here, we must be able to make laws.



Now, the hon Chief Whip of the Opposition tells us that we must accept the Bills. That's not how it should work because

this Bill that a private member will bring will go to the committee, but the committee will deliberate on it and if the decision of the committee says this Bill is undesirable, yes, undesirable ...





... kushiwo njalo, phela isiNgisi sibuye sigilane.





 ... yeah, undesirable, it is the committee that says so because it shall have gone there. Not that we don't allow it. We allow it, but that must be taken into consideration, that it is a Private Member’s Bill, but it does not mean we should accept everything that comes with the Private Member’s Bill.



The members will always work and we will interrogate your Bill and see whether it suits our country. It suits what our people want. We don't just agree because it comes from a member, a private member. We don't just agree because of that, but if it is considerate ... if we realise that it's going to assist us, there's nothing that will stop us from proceeding with that.

Let me proceed and talk about the Budget Office, for instance, to improve communication and to move to a paperless environment, the Irish Parliament has been working on

implementing electronic systems, for instance, record voting and the recordings of the ruling, and one thing that I like about Kenya, for instance, that we learned is that in Kenya there is a Budget Office and that Budget Office assist individual members of the committees whenever they are dealing with their budgets. So there is a specialist who will guide you. It's not easy to understand the numbers and the figures that come from the department, but they have that and that is one of the things that we are taking and want to take home.



For instance, the hon Gwarube was talking about the Ministers answering questions, because of time I'll just respond to some

... What is the use of asking a question if you know what answer you want? Because what she's saying is that we must come up with a Bill or something, a Rule that makes sure we are satisfied with the answers. What answer? Why do you ask if you know what the answer is? No, let's look into this thing, people. Let's not just say that, and we must not choose, the Chief Whip and others said that in Ireland, the Prime Minister comes many times but she didn't mention ... she says, she only comes once in a quarter ... the President comes only once in a quarter, while in Ireland the Prime Minister comes many times to the House to answer questions, but she did not mention that in Kenya, the President of Kenya never answers questions. I

just want to ... [Interjections.] ... no, it's still going down right.







The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto) No? Thank you very much, colleagues. My time is up. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]


Debate concluded.



The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the Report be adopted.


Motion agreed to.



Report accordingly adopted (Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).



The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Thank you very much, House Chair. I move that the House adopts this report. Thank you.


Declarations of vote:


Mr K J MILEHAM: House Chairperson, the purpose of the Budget Review and Recommendation Report is to allow Parliament to exercise its constitutional duty of oversight over the Minister and the department, specifically in terms of their plans, activities and expenditures.


In this regard, it is worth noting that Minster Mantashe could not be bothered to attend his own departmental review nor the tabling of the Auditor-General’s reports. This does not bode well for transparent and accountable government. But, let us be honest, that has never been one of the Minister’s strong points.



However, let’s start with the good news: Several entities in the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy received clean audits. These included the SA National Energy Development Institute, the National Nuclear Regulator, the National Energy Regulator, the Council for Geoscience and the SA Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator.

There were positive developments in the audit outcomes of the Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa and the department itself, but there is still room for significant improvement. We would be remiss however, if we did not point that Parliament has fundamentally failed in its oversight responsibilities by not interrogating all of the entities, or even having them present during our discussions.



The fact that only one entity, Necsa, actually appeared before the committee makes a mockery of this, especially when one considers that the worst-performing entities, the Central Energy Fund and its subsidiaries, the Strategic Fuel Fund and PetroSA have still not submitted their annual reports for consideration, and no attempt was made to bring them before the committee to explain their failure.


The simple fact is that this Minister and this department have failed South Africa. They have failed to deliver reliable sustainable electricity. They have failed to address the fuel price crisis and the security of fuel supply, and they have failed to attract and grow money investment in South Africa.

We cannot another five years of gross incompetence.

In 2024, South Africa has an opportunity to rid itself of the corruption, maladministration and sheer ineptitude of the ANC and Gwede Mantashe, by voting for a party that delivers real change. [Time expired.] The DA does not support this Budget Review and Recommendation Report.



Mr K CEZA: Thank you very much, Chairperson. The EFF firmly rejects the Budget Review and Recommendations Report. We do so for the following reasons: The EFF was the only political party that correctly argued for the amalgamation of the Department of Minerals and the Department of Energy. We did so based on sound and superior logic. However, the two main reasons were energy, which is going to lose in the 2024 elections, failed to appreciate.



In terms of security, we called for one Ministry, responsible for minerals and energy. We did this because we appreciated that South Africa’s energy, and therefore national security is fundamentally based on coal. This is the truth that we cannot run away from, we are still going to rely on coal for a very long time. So, to the two Ministries, one responsible for mining and the other, responsible for energy, is what has in part led to the crisis of electricity blackouts which we find ourselves in, made worse by the deliberate collapse of Eskom.

We went further and called Eskom to report directly to the Department of Minerals and Energy because that will bring a full value chain policy in mining energy generation in one portfolio, but today, we have a Minister of Electricity, with their clownish ideas. The Minister of Public Enterprises, who is hellbent on privatisation, and the Minister of Minerals and Energy is telling us that the problem is the Minister of Public Enterprises but does not want to see it directly.



This a product of political incompetence that we are subjected to. The Budget Review and Recommendations Report fails to deal with this matter. Beyond this political incompetence, we must also deal with administrative shenanigans. The Auditor- General’s findings are not addressed. Wasteful and irregular expenditure continue to increase for payments of storage ... [Time expired.] There is nothing to support.



The ACTING HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): No, he is not! No! No! [Interjections.] Hon Msimang, one second. Hon members, can we just be considerate to hon Msimang. He does have a challenge and he doesn’t use the hearing aids.



Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon House Chair, each year, we evaluate a delivery service performance of departments, how they have

spent the funds that have been allocated to them, and whether there is improvement and at minimum, a willingness to actually implement their own plans and projects.


The IFP notes with grave concern the department’s inability to achieve and maintain consistent clean audits. This cannot be fully realised while its entities do not abide by legislative deadlines when it comes to the submission of financial information to account and auditing purposes.



Working in isolation will do nothing beyond exacerbating the challenges facing the country. Therefore, we encourage the facilitation of functional and mutually beneficial relations with other departments, such as the Department of Hunan Settlements and the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. The one corporation alone will ensure the speedy implementation of crucial programmes, such as the National Solar Heater Programme, which eight in the part against energy shortage.


Hon Chair, the department continues to fall short of fulfilling its task of providing sustainable benefits to all South Africans, from the country’s mineral wealth. It is clear that this can only be achieved once the entire ensures that

its performance indicators are linked to government priorities


... [Time expired.] ... and that it implements competence management against officials who incur irregular as well as fruitless and wasteful expenditure. No good standing. The IFP accepts the report. I thank you House Chair.



Dr W J BOSHOFF: Hon Chair, the Budgetary Review and Recommendations Reports, BRRR of the Department for Mineral Resources and Energy reinforces one’s trust in the Auditor- General. The Auditor-General says in its report that the departments key performance indicators, KPIs do not correspond with the government's priorities. Amongst others, it proceeds that energy security is a key mandate of government, but it is not reflected in the actions of the department.



There are two other indicators not reflected in the BRRR. One, is a President who decided to appoint the Minister for Electricity in the Presidency although he already has a Minister for Energy in the Cabinet, which happens to be also, his. The other is the fact that mining investors nominate South Africa as one of the 10 worst destinations for mining investment in the world.

This is confirmed by the fact that in total only 49 and out of


85 targets were made by the department, leaving 36 unreached.

In addition, a recurring team in the BRRR is vacant, but funded positions, or should we say, funded but vacant positions. This is an indictment on the transformation policy where some people are discouraged from applying for jobs in the public sector while suitable candidates for jobs cannot be found.



Let us be clear. The idea is that each position is created because work must be done. If nobody is appointed, that work must be done and must be added to somebody else's workload. That is how the department fails to reach targets, although the department itself, but not at all its entities got an unqualified audit, the findings as well as the department's own evaluation show that there is much room for improvement. I thank you.



Mr M G MAHLAULE: Hon Chairperson, the ANC supports the BRRR. Although of course the Auditor-General has raised certain weaknesses and areas of concern that have received a significant amount of attention regarding the department’s overall performance for the 2022-23 financial year, the ANC contents that in principle, the department and its state-owned

entities, SOE have relatively improved their performance compared to the previous financial years. One remarkable feature of this thoroughly vetted improved performance was that six SOEs under the department achieved clean audits.



It is essential to stress that this improved performance was not by pure luck. The main force behind it was the department’s proactive performance and role, as well as sophisticated administrative and technical capabilities, which were responsible for a selective set of interventions that turned things around.



The most significant lesson drawn from this improved performance is that the department is capable of effective management of SOEs, and that the attainment of national development objectives relating to energy and mineral resources is certainly a central preoccupation of the department.



While the department achieved an unqualified opinion with findings for the 2022-23 financial year, our conviction as the ANC is that whatever the degree and extent of regression in performance, the department can correct this in ways that do not make things worse. In short achieving a clean audit in the

next financial year is not an elusive and we encourage that the department gets to a clean audit. I thank you.



Question put.




Motion agreed to (Democratic Alliance and Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).



Report accordingly adopted.






The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: House Chair, I move that the report be adopted. Thank you.



Declaration(s) of vote:

Mr T A LE GOFF: House Chairperson, we are as a nation engaged in a bloody war against violent criminals and we are losing. South African mothers and fathers are burying their murdered children every day while ministers receive very important person, VIP, protection services at a cost of nearly

R10 million per VIP.

In the last financial year, SA Police Service, SAPS, spent 99% of its budget and achieved only 65% of its targets, while violent crime surged across the country, killing 27 000 of our own citizens.



The Minister has decimated the reservist’s program, leaving it


with just 3500 members. The DNA,

backlog that he says has been cleared is currently sitting between 50 to 60,000 case exhibits and on his watch, we have lost 8000 detectives in just six years.


Presidential promises of halving violent crime have become conspicuous by their absence as the murder rate rises and government loses control of violent crime.



The people across South Africa are tired of the Minister’s, empty promises and television, TV, interviews. They want results, in the more than R100 billions of their money that should be spent on their protection.


The people of Nelson Mandela Bay, for example, are desperate for this bloody war in their city to end. Every other week we hear of a mass shooting in our townships. Gang killings in the northern areas. Tourists are being attacked and chased out of

the city to such an extent that international tour operators have now taken Nelson Mandela Bay off their route due to rampant criminality in the city. The people of Nelson Mandela Bay want to know when will this nightmare end?



The criminals are winning the war. And it is now clear that government’s plans are not working. What is needed now more than ever before, is a new government with new plans to rescue South Africa from violent crime. And one thing is now certain, and that is that we will only be able to get the criminals off the streets when we get the crooks out of Cabinet.



The DA supports the report.



Mr V GERICKE: House Chairperson, the EFF rejects the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the South African Police Service. The rate of crime in this country is alarmingly high. And extraordinary measures are needed to arrest the descend into complete lawlessness, a state in which none of us would be guaranteed safety and security unless it comes from the criminals themselves.



Over the past three quarters, there are almost 8000 people murdered in each and every corner or quarter in this country.

In contrast, since the Russian - Ukraine war started just about 18,000 people have been killed. Our murder rates are worse than the war-torn countries.


The Minister and the leadership of SA Police Service, SAPS, know these hotspots, in many cases they know who the perpetrators are, and yet nothing of substance has been done to eliminate the problem of crime in our country.



We have over 82 murders every single day in the country and about 169 other offenses. This is not a normal society. There is something inherently wrong with the state, that allows the proliferation of crime and disorder, the way the ruling party has allowed crime to flourish in this country.



On this point, I just want to ask a question. What type of a country have we become, that applies such a lot of violence against his own citizens? What type of a country have we become, when a primary school child, ask a teacher in a country, he tells the teacher bhayzani? What type of language is this, that we are using in classrooms, primary school children that tells a teacher that “I don’t bhayza”? A language that is related to gangsters in this country of South Africa, and yet we sit unfolded.

We need extraordinary measures to contain those violent crimes. And the proliferation of gangsterism, even in our country. We have become a criminal society and crime is enabled implicitly and explicitly by the state. Thank you, House Chairperson. [Time expired.]



Ms Z MAJOZI: House chairperson, one of the biggest concerns regarding the annual performance... [Interjection.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): Hey, hey! You may proceed hon member.



Ms Z MAJOZI: ... thank you, hon House Chair, one of the biggest concerns regarding the annual performance of the South African Police Service, is the fact that SAPS, had civil claims to the value of R108,7 billion, which is more than the department’s total annual budget.


How is it possible that the very entity mandated to defend and implement, the law finds itself at odds with it? What is equally concerning House Chair, is the Auditor-General’s report that no provision for any liability that may result from these several claims, was made in the financial statement. Considering that this is the repeat finding and was

raised in the previous financial year. It brings me to question why we request reports from the likes of the Auditor-General when departments are very clearly apathetic towards the implementation of the AG’s finding?



House Chair, there seems to be a clear lack of effective management and leadership in the department, of the consequence management structures that are in place, are evidently not enough. Therefore, we need more than just the Minister’s acknowledgement that this is a challenge. His department must provide us with an actionable solution.



The SAPS simply cannot act as if they are above the law that governs our country.



Considering the comments made, the IFP accepts the report.



Thank you, House Chairperson





Dr P J GROENEWALD: Die VF Plus wil sy kommer uitspreek in die opsig dat ons hierdie verslae jaar na jaar het. Dan word aanbevelings deur die komitees gemaak maar die vraag is word hierdie aanbevelings behoorlik uitgevoer? Die standpunt is dat

dit nie behoorlik uitgevoer word nie. Byvoorbeeld, sekere aspekte word in hierdie spesifieke verslag aangespreek, byvoorbeeld dat daar gekyk moet word om die Direktoraat vir Voorkeurmisdaadondersoeke beter te finansier en meer mense te gee want hulle doen goeie werk. Dit is noodsaaklik, veral as dit by georganiseerde misdaad kom.





Although financial unqualified, the office of the Auditor General was critical on the manner in which the SA Police Service, SAPS, measures its performance, not taking the experience by citizens into account. Specific reference was made to forensic analysis in terms of the performance management, starting from when the laboratory receives the deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, sample instead of from when the DNA sample was taken from a victim.


Critical information systems are not fully functional and implemented, such as the 10111 call centres. That hampers the production of the police in terms of fighting crime in South Africa.

Linked to the above, the office of the Auditor-General, AG, found that information capturing the SAPS is unreliable. From station level, performance and statistics are not captured correctly, which has a knock effect, and the mistakes are amplified as information moves to the national level. It is very doubtful whether the information reported to Parliament is reliable. Thank you, House Chairperson.



Rev K R J MESHOE: House Chairperson, the failure of SA Police Service, SAPS, to drastically reduce criminality in our country to ensure that citizens feel safe, particularly in their homes, is a great concern to the ACDP.


Of particular concern is the increasing number of reports of criminals who are targeting churches and robbing unsuspecting and vulnerable congregants.



The ACDP calls on government to increase the police budget, that will make it possible for more police to be recruited and that will result in more visibility on the ground, even around the places of worship.



Although the department spent 100% of its budget, it achieved only 67% of its targets. Sadly, even though crime intelligence

achieved all its key performance indicators, KPIs, Zama Zamas have created no go areas around thousands of abandoned mines. And Izinyoka added unnecessary power outages to the burden of load shedding at the cost of about five to seven billion rands a year.



The efficient Auditor-General, did her job well, but the department did not manage to investigate cases of irregular expenditure, let alone to discipline the guilty parties.



As the committee has pointed out, repeated internal findings made by the Auditor-General of SA, AGSA especially in terms of adherence to legislation and internal controls, are a great concern.



If the Department of Police does not care enough to prevent investigate and punish corruption, those who do it will continue to do it. As hon members, visible, policing is hampered by an increase in the police versus population ratio. And in the 24, 2015 ... [Interjection.] Thank you, House Chairperson. [Time expired.]



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: House Chairperson, the NFP supports the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report, BRRR, tabled here

today. But once again we want to reiterate the call to ensure that unless we deal with the socioeconomic conditions, that dysfunctional state of the society we live in, the police cannot, should not and must not be expected to deal with the high levels of crime. You cannot expect police officers to be everywhere at the same time. We need to do more.



In fact, policing in South Africa is a nightmare. I’ve been speaking to police officers this morning. Some of them have been waiting for 10 to 15 years and they don’t get a promotion. They are living in shacks, they have to travel with the firearms and they are getting attacked and killed every other day. The danger allowance we’re giving them is an absolute disgrace - R23! And I ask again: Will we be willing to send our brothers, sisters, children to go and work for 23 then a day as danger allowance? You cannot expect the police to do everything. We need to solve the problem. What is the problem? It’s created by everybody else.



As I occasionally speak to people, and one woman told me she’s a police officer and she travels 130 km a day to work and back. What is she left with? So, I think we need to ensure that we look after our police officers. We need to recruit them from school as part of the curriculum, attract the right

kind of people, pay them a decent wage, and give them decent benefits - danger allowances and things like that. Once they are lost or when they die, nobody even remembers them. Nobody even remembers anything about them – they don’t even visit their family. So, let’s give them their due, and that is why we said you should take those hijacked buildings and turn them into housing units, and let the police officers stay there. In rural areas, build houses before you take police officers there. Let’s look after them if you want to solve the problem, and deal with the root causes of crime or you won’t solve it. Stop blaming the police for everything. The NFP supports the report. Thank you.



Ms M A MOLEKWA: House Chair, the ANC supports the Budget Review Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Police for the Department of Police. The police contribute to the government’s priority of social cohesion and safe communities. We make a call to the society to work with the police in the fight against crime. Police alone cannot fight crime. We support the recommendation of the portfolio committee, which, amongst other things, calls for additional personnel and funding for the SA Police Service, the SAPS, to establish specialised crime policing units, to address economic sabotage and related crimes. We urge the department

to implement the audit findings, as well as to effect consequence management that include steps against employees, incurring irregular and fruitless expenditure.


We reiterate the recommendation on the capacitation of the police through additional funds for recruitment of personnel as well as the capacitation of their Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation, DPCI, to further enable police to deal with crime. The ANC support the BRRR on Police




Ha e be kgotso, Modulasetulo wa Ntlo. Re a leboha.




Question put.




Agreed to.




The ACTING CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): Hon Members, before we call the Twelfth Order of the Day, can I make an appeal – there is this black screen next to the podium. It has writings, which is numbers in white that becomes ember and when it shows red and negative, it means it’s you the speaker who is owing us our minutes and seconds, and not us owing you.

Thank you very much, hon members. I will now request the secretary to read the Twelfth Order of the Day.





The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the Report be adopted.



Declarations of vote:

Mr T A LE GOFF: Chairperson, if we are going to build a strong ecosystem of accountability for police abuse and misconduct, we need to ensure that we build a strong and the Independent Police Investigative Directorate, Ipid, which has the powers to operate without fear, favour or political interference. It has been my experience over the past five Ipid’s BRRR since 2019. The Independent Police Investigative Directorate is being deliberately hamstrung by an executive not interested in accountability for rogue the SAPS members. The Independent Police Investigative Directorate is critically underresourced, underfunded and undercapacitated to adequately fulfil its mandate in an environment of increasing police abuse and misconduct.

This year, Cabinet sent the Independent Police Investigative Directorate Amendment Bill to Parliament, which the state law adviser himself refused to certify as constitutional and which the Minister would have known was unconstitutional, given the noisy debate around this issue over a number of years as well as the Constitutional Court’s decision in the McBride matter. By knowingly sending an unconstitutional Bill to Parliament, the Minister and the Cabinet have exposed their intent insofar as Ipid is concerned.



The Bill was found to be unconstitutional because it removed Parliament’s role in the appointment process of the executive director of Ipid, an issue which was clarified by the Constitutional Court in that McBride judgment. It is impossible that neither the drafters of this Bill nor the Cabinet with all of its advisers did not know the Bill was unconstitutional. What the executive is really telling us is that they don’t want to be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny and they have such little regard for Parliament that they thought we wouldn’t pick it up. This committee is now seized not only with rectifying a flawed Bill, but we have a duty to strengthen it by securing a greater role for Parliament in the appointment process of the executive director. This is literally the least that we can do to secure greater

independence for Ipid so that we can build a stronger ecosystem of accountability for a more professional police service. The DA supports the report.


Mr V GERICKE: Chairperson, we will object with reservations. But let me first and foremost just thank the chairperson of that committee for the professional way in which he conducts that committee and allow fair and democratic debate. The Independent Police Investigative Directorate has in essence failed to deal with the proliferation of criminal conduct within the police, and the sheer disregard for the rights of citizens, particularly black citizens in this country who are abused, beaten up and even killed by police on a regular basis. We have often seen how our police treat black people who are involved in protests as compared to the manner they treat white people. The SAPS is still at the core – a colonial and apartheid force meant to browbeat black people into the lanes that the oppressive neocolonial system has preordained for black people. This means that we need transformation of mind and transformation in art in the SAPS, and also visionary leadership that can take us to the next level.



The institution may be led by black people and even as a black Minister, but at the core, it is a force against black people.

The black leaders are merely tokens who have no philosophical grounding to understand the conduct of the police reinforced colonial stereotypes. The Independent Police Investigative Directorate is supposed to be working hard in operating this disrespect for black lives at the SAPS, but they have spectacularly failed to ... [Inaudible.] ... the police. More importantly, Ipid still reporting to the very same police hierarchy that it is meant to investigate is counterproductive. The ANC is a leader when it comes to the doctrine of the separation of powers. But the ANC is still allowing Ipid to account to the Police department, it cannot be. There must be a separation of powers and they cannot report to the same perpetrators that they investigate. That is a submission of the ... [Time expired.]. I look at you because you’re telling me ...



The ACTING CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): You have tendencies to do funny things when you leave the podium. Please stop it. There’s order here. I would really appreciate if we can do that. No, don’t - just leave. No, no, no, it’s fine. Yes, please. Thank you very much.



Ms Z MAJOZI: Hon Acting House Chairperson, it seems as though within the Department of Police one needs to recognise that

there’s small victories amongst the plethora of challenges and department faces. Therefore, the IFP welcomes and appreciates the Independent Police Investigative Directorate clean audit and the fact that no irregular unauthorised or fruitless and wasteful expenditure was incurred for the 2022-23 financial year. However, we are extremely concern about the 393 cases of deaths as a result of police actions that have been recorded, what separate the police officers’ responsible for these acts from the very alleged criminals that have been killed. It seems as if this police officer shares the same disregard of our country’s Constitution as the criminals, they are mandated to protect from us.



Furthermore, in the 2022-23 financial year, four cases of rape in police custody were reported, which is in case of 100%.

Considering our country’s ongoing battle with gender-based violence and femicide who would the victim of gender-based violence, GBV, turn to for help if we cannot even trust police officers to not violate them. In terms of rape committed by members of the SA Police Service, SAPS, in police custody, the IFP wants the committee’s recommendation that Independent Police Investigative Directorate, Ipid, must submit a report on the success rate of prosecution and convictions on the

aforementioned cases and those related to deaths as a result of police action.



Furthermore, we urge Ipid to also work tirelessly on increasing its footprint in order to reach more people, as there might be hundreds if not thousands, of other victims of police action with no access to Ipid offices, therefore, their cases go unreported. Notwithstanding the comments made, the IFP accepts the report. Thank you, Acting House Chair.




Dr P J GROENEWALD: Voorsitter, daar word gereeld gevra en gesê dat die polisie nie alleen misdaad kan bestry nie. Hulle het ook die burgers van die land nodig om hulle by te staan. Die vraag is hoekom is ons waar ons is? Navorsing toon dat ongeveer 70% van mense in Suid-Afrika nie vertroue in die polisie het nie. In die eerste plek het hulle nie daardie vertroue nie want mens moet lees van mense wat klagtes gaan lê

... vroue wat slagoffers van geweldsmisdaad is en dan word hulle in die polisiestasie verkrag. Dit is hoekom Opod, ’n Onafhanklike Polisieondersoekdirektoraat, so belangrik is.



Ons hoor ook byvoorbeeld dat die Minister wetende dat daar ’n wetsontwerp is wat ongrondwetlik is, dit by die Kabinet

indien; die Kabinet wetende dat dit ongrondwetlik is, dit by die Parlement indien; die lede van die Portefeuljekomitee van Polisie wetende dat die wetsontwerp ongrondwetlik is, eenvoudig maar net daarmee voortgaan. Hulle luister nie na opposisiepartye nie. Dit was duidelik gesê, stuur dit terug na die Departement van Polisie toe ... na die ministerie, maar dit word nie gedoen nie.



Op hierdie oomblik het Opod ’n agterstand van ongeveer

46 000 sake. Dit is duidelik dat die polisie en die ministerie nie wil hê dat daar ’n polisieman vir die polisiediens moet wees nie. Daarom sê die VF Plus dat daar sal indringend gekyk moet word om te sorg dat daar behoorlike beheer is, veral as ons gaan kyk na die miljarde rande van siviele sake teen die polisie ... moet Opod versterk word. Ons ondersteun wel hierdie verslag.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Acting House Chairperson, the National Freedom Party will support the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report, BRRR, on Ipid tabled here today. Well, you know, there is no doubt that Ipid is inundated with investigations as a result of the conduct, particularly of the SA Police Service and many of our officers. However, they at the same time, I want to say that I think that there is too

much of protection in the country for criminals at the expense of the victims to such an extent that even police officers cannot act. Before a police offered to ... [Inaudible.] ... to worry about it, he’s got Ipid behind his back all the time.

Therefore, criminals are taking advantage of a simple thing as you know that when a criminal is coming to you with his back facing you, you can’t do anything about it. However, a criminal will come close to you, turn around and shoot you and you are dead and gone. That is the situation.



Therefore, I think what we need is some amendments to the Act to give more greater protection to police officers and more rights rather than the criminals, including these legal aid and things we need to do it whether is for criminal offenses and things. However, one of the Ipid had an unqualified audit opinion, which we must welcome. However, they’ve been underspending as far as compensation to employees, but at the same time Ipid is extremely understaffed.



Therefore, as we know about the problems that they have with the large number of motor vehicles alone that are out of service, and very importantly, of course, the number of civil claims, something I alluded to earlier on, is that the people, every little thing the police are to blame because of ...

[Interjections.] ... to want to act, and that makes it very difficult. However, the backlog alone for Ipid is sitting at about 46 000, and yet the budget allocation to them is not enough. Therefore, we think you need to give them more work. Let them be more independent, but you need to give more protection to police officers. The NFP supports. Thank you. [Time expired.]



Ms T I LEGWASE: Hon Acting House Chairperson, Chief Whip of the Majority Party and hon members, the Ipid Act makes provision for an independent and impartial investigation of identified criminal offences allegedly committed by members of the SA Police Service and those of municipal police services. This very important role of Ipid is intended to ensure that police act within that their parameters of the law when executing their duties. We commend Ipid for their achievements in terms of having an unqualified audit report with no material findings. The funds allocated towards youth development is also highly appreciated. We call also on the National Treasury to increase Ipid budget allocation for them to be able to fund their expansion as they are looking into increasing the human resource and others in ensuring that they are able to deal with the cases that they are receiving each and every time. Lastly, Ipid should also be able to prioritise

the feeling of their critical vacancies that exist currently. With that few lines, I thank you.



Motion agreed to (Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).




Report accordingly adopted.






The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: House Chair, I move that the report be adopted. Thank you.


Declarations of Vote:


Mr B C GOLDING: House Chair, the security industry in this country comprises 15 000 active businesses, which employ 577 thousand officers, with a further 2,2 million who have been trained. This industry has grown by 31% in this past year. It is the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, PSIRA,’s role to regulate this industry, to ensure that training standards are maintained, and minimum wage and labour legislation are complied with. And to ensure that those with criminal intent are excluded from this lucrative industry.

During 2022-23, PSIRA exceeded its inspection targets of businesses, offices and firearms. Achieving an average of 134% of the target. This is quite sad based on what the hon Whitfield mentioned about the South African Police Service, SAPS. This is a private industry.



Online systems which are used for registration, compliance and self-assessment have been delayed in the current year. Due to supply chain management, SCM, hold-ups, we trust that these matters will be solved in the next year. This past year, the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, PSIRA, has received an unqualified audit, with an emphasis on matters.

Which is an improvement over the previous year’s qualified audit. While these matters have been highlighted by the Auditor-General, it appears that satisfactory measures have been put in place to address them.



PSIRA has accumulated a budgetary surplus of R192 million of which 45 was in this past year as has been reported by them. However, the industry is finding it perpetually difficult to pay these fees, it’s becoming harder. Any increase in fees represents. ... [Interjections.] ...



Information and Communications Technology, ICT, please remove the hon Gabriel from the platform?


Mr B C GOLDING: ... I will be quick. Any increase in fees represents a further indirect tax burden on businesses and individuals who increasingly use the service. The size of this industry dwarfs that of SAPS. It shows that people have less faith in the police and are taking their safety into their own hands. At their own cost. [Time Expired.]



Mr V GERICKE: The EFF rejects the Budgetary Review Recommendation Reports for the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, PSIRA. And we say that the state cannot monitor and manage the actions of private security companies in this country. It’s scary to know what private security companies are doing to citizens in this country. The proliferation of guns and the increase in violent murders cannot be divorced from the rapidly increasing numbers of private security companies that are largely unmonitored, posing a security risk to the nation as a whole.



Our research in the EFF has shown that there are currently over nine and half thousand private security companies in this

country and almost 500 000 active private security guards and well over one and a half million trained but inactive private security guards. They are better armed than the South African Police Service, SAPS, and the army and these private securities can overrun the country at any given time. The role played by the PSIRA in ensuring that these companies are regulated is almost negligible.



The PSIRA is a law unto itself. We need PSIRA to be given the necessary authority and resources to keep these companies under surveillance.



We need better leadership at both the political and administrative levels at the SAPS to prevent crime and ensure our citizens are safe. We cannot allow a situation where security companies play police they chase away people who walk through farms to the beach to go fishing. And search people without warrants along the wayside. This is currently what’s happening in the Western Cape and more so in George.


We cannot allow the situation as it is and therefore there needs to be regulation and there needs to be a regulatory authority to prevent it. We must guard against an up rise of

our nation, because these security companies in many ways, are provoking the heart and soul of the nation. Thank you so much.



Ms Z MAJOZI: Hon House Chair, earlier this year, the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, PSIRA, reported that the demand for security and guarding services from the private sector has gone significantly over the last decade. As of the end of 2022, there are close to 2,7 million registered security guards in the country. With more than 580 000 currently employed, a serious registration programme is of utmost importance and cannot afford to have achieved only 50% of its performance target.


Considering the rapid rate at which the demand for security officers is growing, the department needs to ensure that adequate systems are in place to meet the required average turnaround time of 12 working days, for registration of applications meeting all the requirements for security officers.



The committee recommends that PSIRA should strengthen its system to enforce compliance with the security businesses as well as the security office as prescribed by the regulation of the industry. Based on the numbers provided by PSIRA, there is

an indication that for every police officer, there are four private security guards. Therefore, the IFP wants to join the committee in its call for PSIRA to strengthen its system, to enforce compliance with the security businesses as well as the security office as prescribed by the regulation of the industry. In consideration of all the comments that have been made, the IFP accepts the report. Thanks, Chair.




Dr P J GROENEWALD: Voorsitter, die afgelope 10 jaar het die aantal geregistreerde sekuriteitsmaatskappye met 86% tot

15 113 sulke instansies toegeneem. Dit beteken ook dat as ons na die aantal geregistreerde aktiewe sekuriteitsbeamptes gaan kyk, dan sien ons dat dit 577 444 is.



Die vraag is, hoekom het ons in hierdie situasie beland? As ons gaan kyk na die aantal aktiewe of kan ons sê operasionele lede in die SA Polisiediens, dan beteken dit dat vir elke polisiebeampte is daar drie sekuriteitsbeamptes. Dit het ontstaan omdat die polisie nie sy grondwetlike plig om die mense van Suid-Afrika en hul eiendom te beskerm kan nakom nie.




Therefore, the people of South Africa had no choice. They had to pay for a private security service. The FF Plus has demanded and will continue to do so, that private individuals and individuals paying for security services be deducted from income tax, as this is a constitutional obligation for police services and the government. South Africa cannot be a place without the security companies and the security officers.

Crime is already out of control. Can you just imagine without all these security companies? We will support the recommendations report. Thank you.


Mr A M SHAIK-EMAM: Hon Chairperson, when we talk about security, we should not forget the plight of the Palestinian population in Gaza and the West Bank. The barbaric Zionist state of Israel repeatedly threatens them with bombings. With the support of some members of this House.



The private security industry, which seems to be booming, is indeed very large and growing in numbers. But as far as the portfolio committee’s report on the police is concerned, there are several weaknesses. Although they received an unqualified audit opinion, there were also several findings. However, the portfolio committee made a whole series of recommendations that they would like to look at.

Very importantly, in my opinion, they have no control over the security companies and their employees. In the security industry, it is often the case that if the employees don’t turn up for work, they just take anyone and put them there. So there is no supervisory mechanism, not even for firearms.

Firearms are allocated to security companies. But when the security companies hire people, they just give them the guns to use. And that becomes a big problem.


Collusion between security officials and criminals is also on the rise in the country. Therefore, the portfolio committee has recommended that the security forces be trained for the cash in transit sector. They have also recommended strengthening internal control measures and other things. So I think the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, PSIRA, itself still has a lot of work to do, even in the licencing mechanisms that they use. Anybody and everybody appears to be opening security companies today. It seems to be good business. The NFP supports the report. Thank you.



Ms T I LEGWASE: Hon House Chairperson, hon Chief Whip of the Majority Party and Members of Parliament, I greet you once again, let me briefly address the part that hon Groenewald mentioned, namely that the police are failing. I think we all

know that the South African Constitution states that the South African Police Service, SAPS, is responsible for the prevention, suppression and investigation of crime in our country and the maintenance of law and order. It also protects and ensures that the inhabitants of this country are safe.

That is still the responsibility of SAPS and this ruling current of the ANC-led government is still fully responsible for that.


Chairperson, the African National Congress supports the Budget Review Recommendation report from the Portfolio Committee on the Private Security Industry Regulation Authority, PSIRA. We commend PSIRA for the clean audit report for three consecutive years. PSIRA has achieved 84% of its performance targets, with a slight improvement on the previous year, as it has also achieved 100% for its programmes to ensure effective regulation in the industry. The committee recommends that PSIRA address its irregular expenditure and take remedial action. PSIRA should develop a curriculum that includes training on the transportation of cash-in-transit. PSIRA strengthens its systems to enforce compliance with the security businesses as prescribed by the regulation in the industry The ANC fully supports the Budgetary Review and

Recommendations Report, BRRR, on PSIRA. I thank you, Chairperson.



Question put.




Agreed to.






The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: On condition that I get speaking allowance. I move for the adoption of this report. [Laughter]


The ACTING HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): Thank you Chief Whip of the Majority Party. You should have added that on your recommendations. Nevertheless, we shall proceed hon members. The allocated time of two minutes is applicable. I now recognise the DA.



Declarations of vote:

Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson and hon members, the department of the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service’s mission is to provide effective and efficient civilian oversight over the police, for safer and more secure communities through public community participation, legislation and policy development. A clean audit result suggests that the department achieved its goals, as R152,6 million of the allocated R155,92 million budget was spent. A mere underspending of R3,2 million.

However, the real test remains, how successful the department is in improving its key focus areas. For example, enhancing service delivery and addressing confidence in the police.



Research by Gordon revealed that the trust me the police in 2022 was only 23%, and it’s still declining. This in its efforts is to reduce crime, provide quality service and stimulate economic growth. The community does not understand the department’s mandate, nor do they experience any improvement in service delivery or crime reduction. Therefore, the necessity of the existence of this department is often questioned while dysfunctional community police forums are cited as contributing to the problem.



The timely drafting of relevant legislation and policy documents is a serious cause of concern, with glaring examples

such as the unconstitutional Independent Police Investigative Directorate Amendment Bill tabled in Parliament. The long- awaited Police Amendment Bill that will only be finalised by the Seventh Parliament and the police trying to streamline disciplinary regulations. The DA supports the report. Thank you.



Mr V GERICKE: Madam Chairperson, we have already said that we have the right to defer an object, and when we do so; we do so in a matter of principle. And so, despite the legislative provisions to create the Civilian Secretariat that will be the bridge between the police and civilians, there continue to be a very sharp chisel between the police and the South African society, as a result of the hard-handed nature of the police relating to ordinary law-abiding citizens, particularly black people.



This institution is a very powerful institution that is supposed to bring communities and the police together, but there is a problem. While this is the problem, the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service, CFPS continues to move on like a headless chicken and the entity must live up to its mandate. The transition of this department into becoming an independent department not accountable to SA Police Service, SAPS anymore,

was never carefully thought through, and successive Police Ministers a failed to properly locate the CSPS.



The Civilian Secretariat for Police Service is a very good example of our corporate governance and aboveboard financial management has been compromised by this administration. For years now, the secretariat has been receiving qualified audit opinions from the Auditor-General, AG who has highlighted a number of issues that were also noted by the committee in the previous financial year. Matters relating to the unprofessional nature with which financial statements are prepared, misstatements and expenditure on capital projects and so on and so on.



The secretariat despite its important constitutional obligations, still does not have a service delivery improvement plan, despite the committee recommending that they do develop such a plan. Under the circumstances, the secretariat cannot execute its constitutional obligations to provide oversight over SAPS in an optimal manner. And therefore, we reject the report. We may need to revisit the constitutional mandate of this and place it ... [Inaudible]

... where it needs to be. Thank you very much indeed.

Ms Z MAJOZI: Hon House Chairperson, I would like to start by commending the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service on its clean audit, which is an improvement compared to the previous financial year, in which a matter of emphasis was raised on material understanding. As we have concluded from the declaration made about the Budget Review and Recommendation Report, BRRR out of the SA Police Service, there is a need for greater emphasis to be placed on the implementation of Independent Police Investigative Directorate, IPID recommendation and consequence management.



Considering that one of the functions of this department is to provide civilian oversight over the police service through monitoring and evaluating overall police performance. The review of SA Police Service Disciplinary Regulation should be regularly conducted to ensure that any recommended amendments have been implemented. Departments cannot be allowed to pick and choose when and how often they want to implement recommendations. Therefore, the IFP wants to reiterate the committee’s recommendation that, greater attention should be given to monitoring the implementation of recommendations made to the SAPS, especially considering the fact that the recommendations issued by the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service are not adequately tracked and monitored, to ensure an

impact on the service delivery of the SAPS. Notwithstanding the comments, the IFP accepts the report. Thank you, Chair.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Chairperson, the NFP supports the report tabled here today. Allow me first of all to congratulate the Civilian Secretariat for having a clean audit, but over and above that, for reaching all its targets. However, I have a problem sometimes when we set targets, and whether we get value for money out of those targets. I see that Civilian Secretariat has achieved all the targets that they have set.


However, I think there are weaknesses remaining in this sector as well. First of all, I think there’s a lack of understanding when it comes to the public as to what is the role and responsibility of the Civilian Secretariat. But my understanding is that they are working on that so that ... [Inaudible.] I think the other issue that they should be working on in particular when it comes to the police, is the issue of the entire promotion system. An unhappy police officer or anyone that is unhappy where they are unemployed, will not deliver. I think that is something else that they need to work on.

Then very importantly, is the issue of wellness of police officers. With the trauma that they experience on a daily basis, it’s got to be an ongoing thing, where you have to monitor them and see whether they still in a good state of mind. And particularly if you notice that the high levels of criminal activities we’re having amongst police officers, and also the impact it’s having on gender-based violence, if you look at the number of cases of police officers that are abusing their spouses. I think that’s the other thing that we need to look at.



But I think very importantly, the Civilian Secretariat is reasonably performing. However, there are lots and lots more that we believe that needs to be done. And I think only they have a better understanding of what their role is, together with the other stakeholders and role-players that will be able to do. The NFP supports this Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report, BRRR. Thank you very much.




Mof M A MOLEKWA: Tlotla le hlompho ke tla di lebisa ho Mme Masephadi wa rona, Mme Castelina Pemmy Majodina, le Ntlo ka kakaretso.



Hon Chair, having considered the Annual Performance Report of the Civilian Secretariat of Police Service, the ANC supports the Budget Review Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Police for Civilian Secretariat of Police Service. House Chair, we commend the Civilian Secretariat of Police Service for achieving a clean audit for the financial year 2022-23. We also note progress made in the decrease in underspending as compared to the previous financial year.



The Civilian Secretariat of Police Service has exceeded the 50% target of the number of female appointments in the senior management positions. We urge the Civilian Secretariat of Police Service to develop strategies to drive bigger impact on police performance and professionalism. Hon House Chair, we further say that the Civilian Secretariat of Police Service should improve its marketing strategies to the public to bring about awareness of the role that it plays in the police accountability. The ANC supports the report.




Ke a leboha Modulasetulo wa Ntlo.




Question put.

Motion agreed to.




Report accordingly adopted.






The ACTING HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms R M M Lesoma): Hon members, I wish to remind you that this matter was debated in a virtual mini-plenary on 10 November, but that the decision thereon can only be taken by a full plenary sitting. This is also the case for the other decisions of questions. The House will decide when we consider orders 16 to 21 of this Order Paper.



There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.




Report accordingly adopted.




There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.




Report accordingly adopted.






There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.




Report accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance dissenting).




There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.



Report accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance dissenting).






There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.




Report accordingly adopted.






There was no debate.




Question put: That the Report be adopted.

Report accordingly adopted.






There was no debate.



Question put: That the Report be adopted.




Report accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance and Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).


Business of the day concluded.



The House adjourned at 18:53.