Outrage over new set of proposals on rural courts bill

PUBLIC hearings on the fiercely contested Traditional Courts Bill got off to a bumpy start yesterday when it emerged that the Department of Justice had made significant changes to its earlier proposals on the bill.

The altered document was not publicly circulated, but has been doing the rounds between departments interested in the bill, particularly the departments of Justice and Constitutional Development, Women, Children and People with Disabilities and Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

The hearings began in the National Council of Provinces select committee on security and constitutional development yesterday, with 21 organisations and individuals set to make submissions.

The latest document proposes substantial changes, including a change of its name to the Resolution of Certain Disputes by Traditional Councils Bill.

Most significantly, the document proposes that traditional courts should be subsumed into the “traditional councils” created in terms of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act of 2003.

Traditional courts would no longer be courts of law, but tribunals or forums. Appeals to the formal court system would no longer be allowed, as this could be seen to be “undermining the exclusive social cohesion” of traditional authorities, and the controversial sanctions in the current bill would be limited.

The move has outraged the Alliance for Rural Democracy, which represents a wide range of rural and women’s organisations, which said they felt they were making submissions on a new set of proposals that had not yet been made public.

In a statement issued after yesterday’s committee, the alliance slammed the Justice Department’s proposals, saying they were, in effect, presenting a new bill.

“The proposals… will not fix the fundamental problems with the bill,” the alliance said.

“Instead, they signal a move backwards in the debate. The way the department has introduced these new and substantive proposals is procedurally questionable.

“We reiterate our position that neither tinkering with the existing bill, nor underhanded tactics, such as the department’s new proposals of today, will address the fundamentally flawed process and content of this bill.”

Rejected

The stated aim of the bill – which has been rejected by prominent women and civil society organisations, including, until recently, Minister of Women, Children and People with Disabilities Lulu Xingwana and the ANC Women’s League – is to regulate traditional courts and customary law to bring them into line with the constitution.

Critics say that, while entrenching the rights of traditional leaders, the bill ignores the plight of vulnerable citizens and women.

Suspicions have been raised that the bill is aimed at appeasing traditional leaders before the ANC’s elective conference in December.

Earlier this month, Justice Minister Jeff Radebe said the bill would not be withdrawn.