Denying account impacts rights
THE right to banking facilities might have been left out of the Constitution because “you cannot put everything in”, but such rights are left to the court to interpret, said former commissioner of the South African Human Rights Commission, Professor Karthy Govender.
In an interview with Independent Media’s investigations unit, Govender said although there is nothing in the Constitution that says people have the right to a bank account, denying them access to such financial facilities might impact other basic rights, which are contained in the country’s Bill of Rights.
Independent Media sourced a viewpoint on the matter from Govender, a retired University of KwaZulu-Natal constitutional studies professor, following decisions by the country’s major banks to “unbank” individuals and companies who they believe purport to have a reputational risk on their own banking operations.
“While it is not a direct right, other rights may be affected if somebody is arbitrarily refused a bank account because if you don’t have a bank account, it is very difficult to conduct a business, etc,” said Govender.
Govender, who has worked with the Constitution for years, said this very important document says nothing about entitlement to a bank account. This is despite a person being unable to have access to money without a bank account.
“It may impact on other rights. For example, you have a right not to be discriminated against based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Subject to proper regulation by the state, you also have a right to engage in economic activities because you have to sustain yourself,” he said.
“Let us assume I get denied the right to a bank account because I belong to a particular religious organisation, and that may amount to either a violation of freedom of religion or a right not to be subjected to unfair discrimination,” he said.
He said: “Obviously,” if an account holder does not handle his or her account properly and he or she becomes ‘unbanked’, and therefore, there was a rational basis for the denial of such facilities, “then in those instances, there would not be a violation”.
Sekunjalo Investment Holdings (SIH) chairman Dr Iqbal Survé and related entities are among the latest victims of the banks’ arbitrary decisions, which appear to lack valid reason.
The banks have largely based their action on negative reports carried by media organisations that are competitors of Sekunjalo’s Independent Media. The “unbanking” of Sekunjalo and its related companies has placed the future of thousands of employees and their dependants on the line.