NATIONAL SEmINAR 2012 Cross Examining our Constitutional Democracy: Does Your Vote Really Count?
Justice PROuDLY HOSTED BY
uCT | uWC | SuN
ProgrammE designed by madeleine dreyfuss 2012
of contents theme................................................................... 1 welcomE............................................................. 2 schedule............................................................ 2-5 SESSION BLuRBS.................................................. 6-24 SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIES....................................... 25-39 mAP....................................................................... 42
In light of the fact that that our democracy approaches the age of majority (18 years) this year, we feel it appropriate that it take a grown up, critical look at itself. The theme we have selected for this year’s seminar is thus: Cross Examining our Constitutional Democracy: Does Your Vote Really Count?
We are all students. Students from around the country who have been drawn together by a common vision, a common belief, and a common purpose. We may come from different universities, different backgrounds, speak different langauages, and have different opinions, but for this weekend we come together to address a common question: does our vote really count? We have gathered the foremost political and legal experts to answer this pivitol question at a time when such questioning has never been more needed. It is our sincere hope that if nothing else you leave this seminar with a burning desire to know more, to challenge, to question, to understand, and to fulfill the ideals of our consitutional democracy.
The transformative constitutional project that we set off on in 1993, which Karl Klare describes as a project of affecting “large scale social change through nonviolent political processes grounded in law” was one of breathtaking scale. No one could expect that South African society would transform overnight. If South Africa set off on a transformative journey at the onset of our constitutional dispensation, then certainly we have yet to arrive at our destination. Of course, this is not necessarily an indication of failure. It has been suggested that if viewed as a permanent ideal rather than a temporary event, transformation is a journey that has no destination. Justice Langa has commented that transformation might rather be viewed as a way of looking at the world that creates a space in which dialogue and contestation are truly possible, in which new ways of being are constantly explored and created, accepted and rejected and in which change is unpredictable but the idea of change is constant.
Be informed. Be inspired. Be the difference. It has been an aboslute pleasure to organise and host this seminar and we remain sincerely yours, Quintin, Peter, Ariane, minhaaj, Dean, Tom, Sophia and Kirsten. 2012 Seminar Organising Committee.
“Dialogue and contestation” are what we are aiming for with this seminar. But it is important of course that this dialogue occurs in an atmosphere that is constructive and healthy and reasoned as opposed to the tone that has been heard in recent months.
18 years into our constitutional democracy it is right that we take stock of where we have come from, where we are headed, and whether we are agreed on where we would like to be. During our seminar this year we would like to critically discuss the role that our constitutional democratic institutions and role players have played thus far and how we need them to function in the future.
13h00 13h30 18h00 19h00 20h30
Movie - ‘Dear Mandela’
Evening Activities - Pub Quiz
SEPTEMBER 22 Time Activity
08h00 08h45 Welcome, Overview and Introduction 09h15 Plenary: The Vision of the Constitutional Drafters: Are we doing it Justice?
10h45 Consolidation Groups – Briefing for all students 11h00 Breakaway: What is the electoral system and does it serve our Constitutional
Plenary: Chapter 9 institutions and Civil Society Movements – Building a Stronger South Africa? Dr. Jobson, Ms. Sanger. Chaired by Justice O’Regan.
Justice Chaskalson, Adv. Budlender, Ms. Love. Chaired by Justice Cameron.
2) What is our Electoral System, and does it serve our Democratic Vision?: Adv. Hoffman
3) Nature of Democratic transformations: Mr. Gottschalk, Ms. Love.
Outside 12h15 Consolidation Groups 12h30 Lunch 13h15 Plenary: Does Transformation of the Legal Profession also necessitate reform of MAIN HALL Legal Education? Deputy Minister Nel, Adv. Hassim, Ms. Pooe, Mr. Swart. Chaired by Prof. de Vos.
14h45 Free time 16h00 Plenary: Transformative Constitutionalism and the legislature:
2) A critical analysis of the function, form and operation of the Small Claims and Community Courts in making “Justice for All” accessible. Ms. Samaai.
3) Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Deference: Judge Davis, Justice O’Regan, Adv. Malindi.
12h15 13h00 13h30 14h30 15h00
Election of National Executive Committee
17h00 Tea 17h15 Plenary: Threats to Democracy, Access to Justice in a State of Secrecy?
18h30 Consolidation Groups 19h30 Dinner 20h30 Fireside discussions: Law versus law:
Prof. Botha, Dr. Motshekga, Ms. Ben-Zeeve Chaired by Mr. Wilson
Mr. Bhardwaj, Adv. Trengove. Chaired by Mr. Heywood
Using the law to fight unjust legal systems – past and present. Delegates and members of the legal profession meet informally with students around the fire and discuss how the law has in the past and continues to be used to overcome itself. Justice Chaskalson, Judge Davis, Adv. Budlender, Adv. Trengove and Dr. Klatzow. Chaired by Adv. Hassim.
Free time Plenary: Powers of the President vs. Powers of the Constitutional Court: The Review of the Constitution: Dr. Motshekga, Prof. Corder, Mr. Daniels, Justice O’Regan. Chaired by Judge Davis. Breakaway: Building Social Movements to advance the human rights and the Constitution. 1) Social Justice Coalition: Axolile Notywala
2) Equal Education: Yoliswa Dwane
3) SECTION27: Nikki Stein
4) DGRU&CLASI: Chris Oxtoby, Tabeth Masengu, Meetali Jain
Information sharing and report back session between SLSJ branches and NEC.
MAIN HALL Outside MAIN HALL on the grass
Breakaway: Judging judges 1) The Role of the Judiciary in Transforming Society: Dr Liebenberg.
1) Dominant Party Systems: Dr. Reddy, Dr. de Jager
The Vision of the Constitutional Drafters: Are we doing it Justice?
SEPTEMBER 23 Time 08h00 09h00 09h30 10h30 12h00 13h00
Closing consolidation groups
Closing Plenary: The role of SLSJ in advancing the Constitution
Pack and tidy
SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
This Plenary session aims to set the tone of the Seminar, through anecdotal accounts by the speakers of the era of the drafting of the Constitution, and the role which they played in the negotiation process. This would be then contrasted against whether or not the aims of the drafters, and the Constitutionaldrafting process, transition have been met. Of key interest would be the hopes which they had for the process- the goals, the dreams and the aspirations of the negotiators, and the aim of the overall process. Each speaker was posed the following questions: - - - -
What was lost during the negotiation process which would have fur thered democracy today? If you could advise the drafters of the Constitution with the wisdom of hindsight, what advice would you give them, and what would you sug gest that they do differently? The period of negotiations was one fraught with the danger of immi nent civil war. Did this fear affect the negotiation process? Were the aims and hopes of the Constitutional drafters fulfilled then, and are they being given effect to now?
THE Speakers ARE: Justice Chaskalson, Adv. Budlender, Janet Love and the Chair is Justice Cameron.
SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMEBER 2012 DAY 2
SATUrDAY 22 SEPTEMEBER 2012 DAY 2
Dominant Party Systems:
Why Our Electoral System?
This session will examine the Dominant Party system as a phenomenon in constitutional democratic countries, especially within the South African political system. The speakers will discuss the effects of a Dominant Party system on both a micro and a macro level. This session aims to tie in with the first plenary, wherein the vision of the Constitutional drafters was discussed. The speakers have been asked to present on the following questions:
South Africaâ€™s post-apartheid electoral system has faced an array of criticisms over the past 18 years. This session aims to discuss the electoral system in light of our Constitutional provisions and determine whether or not the result of this chosen system creates tension in a constitutional democracy.
- - - -
- - - - -
What is the electoral system and does it serve our Constitutional vision?
How do DPs arise? How do DPs tie in with national liberation movements? What is the South African context? Where do we stand in South Africa in terms of the stereotypical DP system?
The speakers are: Dr. Reddy and Dr. De Jager.
What is the electoral system and does it serve our Constitutional vision?
Adv. Hoffman has been asked to present according to the following questions: What is South Africaâ€™s Electoral System and how does it work? In the South Aftcan context, is there any ES which could avoid a domi nant party system? Do our votes really count? The Van Zyl-Slabbert commission made certain recommendations. What was the commission, and what were these recommendations?
The speaker is: adv. hoffman
SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
SATuRDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
What is the electoral system and does it serve our Constitutional vision?
Does transformation of the legal profession also necessitate reform of legal education?
The Nature of Transformations â€“ The Waves of Democratic Transformation: South Africaâ€™s turbulent political history is familiar to many. The transition from systematic racial segregation to a fully-fledged democracy is in its 18th year. This session will take a critical look at the South African democracy from a political point of view. The speakers will discuss the role that the Constitution plays in developing a legitimate democracy and the political conditions of the South African democracy. The speakers have been asked to present on the following questions: - Explain to us the theory behind democratic transformation - Is South Africa facing a stagnation of its political system? - If there is, hypothetically, a ping-pong of successfully contestations of elections between our opposition, the DA, and the ANC, can it be said that SA has achieved a true democracy? Do we not need more than 2 strong political parties to be a viable democracy? How can we achieve this?
The speakers are:
In South Africa the LLB is offered both at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Despite the intensive nature of the LLB degree, many students feel underprepared for articles and life as a legal professional. It has been argued that this is due to a disjuncture between the legal education system and the legal world, aswell as the transformation of society since the Constitutional era. This plenary seeks to answer the questions surrounding legal education in South Africa. The panel has been asked to present on the following questions: - - - -
Do we need transformation of our legal system? Are graduates adequately equipped after graduation? Should the LLB degree be exended to a post graduate degree? What role should government play [specifically the DoJCD] in devel oping our legal education?
The speakers are: Deputy Minister Nel, Adv. Hassim, Ms. Pooe, Mr. Swart and Chair Prof. de Vos.
SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
Transformative Constitutionalism and the legislature
Threats to Democracy
Access to Justice in a State of Secrecy: This session will give an overview of Constitutional transformation in South Africa. This will include reasons for the importance of transformation and how the Constitution gives effect to this transformation. Furthermore, this session will discuss the obligations on the Legislature to further transformation and importantly, where South Africa is now. As a voting public, public participation in democratic processes should demand accountability of the Executive. In so doing we would promote openness and transparancy and further democratic and constitual ideals and principles. There will be special emphasis placed on the extra-parliamentary opposition and freedom of protest.
The speakers are: Prof. Botha, Dr. Motshekga, Ms. BEN-ZEEVE, Mr. Wilson.
Freedom of expression is a right enshrined in the Bill of Rights. It includes, amongst other things, freedom of the press and other media, as well as freedom to receive or impart information and ideas. Access to information is also enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Censorship and secrecy in general, as well as the proposed Protection of State Information Bill in particular are an obvious violation of these rights. While one of the aims of this session is certainly to illustrate just how severely such a bill might limit these rights, our intention is to delve a little deeper into the matter and explore just how much of an impact such a limitation has on the exercise of so many other rights and how they are rights of fundamental importance in a society based on democratic values, social justice, and fundamental human rights (the kind of society which the Preamble to the Constitution calls for the establishment of). Section 32(1)(b) of the Constitution alludes to this well when it guarantees everyone a right of access to any information that is, â€œrequired for the exercise or protection of any rightsâ€?. The panel will answer the question of how access to justice is affected by a state of secrecy or a State that functions in secret.
The speakers for this session will be: Adv. Trengove and Mr. Bhardwaj.
Fireside discussion SATURDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 2
This relatively informal session allows students and speakers to meet around the bonfire and hear anecdotal accounts of the law being used to fight the unjust Apartheid legal system. The theme is ‘The Law versus the Law- how the law is used to fight unjust legal systems, past and present’. Each speaker will reflect on his personal experiences.
The speakers are: Adv. Budlender, Justice Chaskalson, Judge Davis, Adv. Hassim, Dr. Klatzow and AdV. Trengove.
Chapter 9 institutions and Civil Society Movements – Building a Stronger South Africa? SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3 These institutions fulfil a vital role in society insofar as they provide an alternative source for the people of South Africa to challenge the power of government, thereby providing a support to democracy. The cost of litigation being as prohibitively high as it is, and access to justice being accordingly limited, the independence of these institutions is crucial in ensuring that government is adequately taken to task when failing in its Constitutional mandates. Questions posed to the Speakers include: Cherith Sanger: - What are the Chapter 9 institutions and from where do they draw their power? - What challenges do they face in the exercise of their mandate? - Does government support these institutions as far as it suits govern ment’s purposes? - Finances are key to the smooth running of Chapter 9 institutions & Civil Society Movements; does government use its funds to control Chapter 9 institutions & Civil Society Movements? - What are the other constraints on independence, and what can civil society movements do to ensure the independence of Chapter 9 insti tutions and the success of Civil Society Movements Dr. Jobson: - While they are a laudable concept, can these institutions function in Africa? Or are they too Eurocentric? Should the President as head of the Executive not function as unilaterally as the situation demands ie do they not put the interests of a minority before the interests of the majority? - Where does the President stand on these institutions? - Talk us through the review of the Chapter 9 Institutions in which Khu lumani participated. - What was the content of Pregs Govender’s report? - Outline the value and strength of these organisations, government’s opinion and the stance government takes to these institutions.
THE Speakers are: Dr. Jobson (Khulumani), Cherith Sangerand the Chair is Justice O’Regan.
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
What is the role of the Judiciary in developing our Society:
A Critical Analysis of the function, form , and operation of the small claims and community courts and making â€œJustice for allâ€? accessible.
It is often said that the members of the Judiciary are the guardians of the Constitution- however who guards the guardians themselves? The Judiciary has worked hard to develop our society in many cases- Makwanyane and Grootboom are examples of the massive weight of the jurisprudence which has moved South Africa away from the Apartheid era law, and into an era where the rights in the Bill of Rights are given effect to. This session will concentrate on the positive obligation placed on the Judiciary to advance the development of South African society. The speaker has been asked to address the following questions: - Has the judiciary done enough to change society towards the aspira tions of the Constitution? - Has the judiciary been too wary of the Separation of Powers, and too wary of usurping the Legislature as the engine for law reform? - Where is the middle ground, if any, and where is it to be found- the Bill of Rights, the historical context, interpretation of statutes or in subjective feelings of members of the Judiciary?
Community courts and the small claims courts are widely used by the majority of the population and are thus a vital part of access to justice. As such, it is crucial that these courts operate in a way which is expedient, efficient, and fair. This is hindered by the relative apathy of members of the legal profession in volunteering their services to these courts. Ms. samaai will, using her substantial experience, describe the situation on the ground, the question of separation of powers in relation to the commissions of the small claims court and will offer an invaluable perspective of the social realities facing the vast majority of our population.
The speaker is: Ms. saMaai
The speaker IS: Dr. Liebenberg.
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
Judicial Activism vS. Judicial Deference:
The Vision of the Constitutional Drafters: Are we doing it Justice?
There is often a need for the Judiciary to adapt anachronistic laws, or to intervene in urgent matters where rights are being infringed or threatened. Given the system of stare decisis, these judgments can fundamentally alter the legal landscape. This session will firstly discuss how the courts balance their obligations as custodians of the Constitution and their obligations towards the separation of powers. Secondly, the session will examine how the Courts deal with the problem of Polycentric decisions. The speakers will discuss the following questions: - Despite being unelected, and therefore facing the counter-majoritarian dilemma, could the judiciary not rely on their inherent legitimacy as justification for making law in order to protect Constitutional values and basic rights? - Given the sloth-like nature of the Legislature in many matters, con trasted to the relatively expedient nature of the Judiciary in adapting unjust or unconstitutional laws, would it not be justified for the Judi ciary to take a more aggressive stance in law making, and in the uphold ing of the Constitutional values? - South Africa is incredibly diverse and multi-cultural. Is Judicial Activ ism legitimate if there is a matter pertaining to a culturally sensitive matter, and the judges are not familiar with that culture? If yes, how so? If not, what would the solution be?
The speakers are: Justice Oâ€™Regan and Adv. Malindi, Chaired by Judge Davis.
POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT VS. POWERS OF THE CONTITuTIONAL COuRT
This Plenary session aims to set the tone of the Seminar, through anecdotal accounts by the spekaers of the era of the drafting of the Constitution, and the role which they played in the negotiation process. This would be then contrasted against whether or not the aims of the drafters, and the Constitutionaldrafting process, transition have been met. Of key interest would be the hopes which they had for the process- the goals, the dreams and the aspirations of the negotiators, and the aim of the overall process. Each speaker was posed the following questions: - What was lost during the negotiation process which would have fur thered democracy today? - If you could advise the drafters of the Constitution with the wisdom of hindsight, what advice would you give them, and what would you sug gest that they do differently? - The period of negotiations was one fraught with the danger of immi nent civil war. Did this fear affect the negotiation process? - Were the aims and hopes of the Constitutional drafters fulfilled then, and are they being given effect to now?
The speakers are: Justice Chaskalson, Roelf Meyer, Adv. Budlender, Janet Love and the Chair is Justice Cameron.
Zuma wants Constitutional Court powers reviewed: report Sapa | 13 February, 2012 13:03 President Jacob Zuma wants to review the Constitutional Court’s powers, according to a report on Monday. “We don’t want to review the Constitutional Court, we want to review its powers,” Zuma told The Star newspaper during an interview. “It is after experience that some of the decisions are not decisions that every other judge in the Constitutional Court agrees with.” This was reportedly part of a democratic process to counterbalance the powers of the three arms of the state. According to the newspaper, the issue was raised by a deputy minister and African National Congress leaders at the party’s national executive committee meeting two weeks ago and was discussed by Cabinet ministers. Zuma told the newspaper it was a “general societal issue” that was being raised. He questioned the logic of having split judgements and said judges were being influenced by the media. “How could you say that [the] judgement is absolutely correct when the judges themselves have different views about it?” Zuma asked. He said that if decisions by Parliament could be challenged, there was nothing wrong with questioning the judiciary. Democratic Alliance MP Dene Smuts called on Zuma to clarify his remarks. “President Zuma will find that he is on the path to a full-blown confrontation with the Constitutional Court if his remarks really mean what they seem to mean, because the court itself decides the constitutionality of constitutional amendments,” Smuts said in a statement on Monday. “It is apparent from the President’s remarks that irritation with some of the court’s judgements lies at the root of the desire for review.”
Govt defends plan for Constitutional Court review The government maintains that a proposed assessment of the Constitutional Court’s judgments is not an attempt to undermine judicial independence. Spokesman Jimmy Manyi said on Thursday (23/02/2012) that the Cabinet had reinforced both President Jacob Zuma’s message and Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Jeff Radebe’s statement by “welcoming debate and discourse which is characteristic of our constitutional democracy”. Cabinet held its regular fortnightly meeting on Wednesday. Manyi said in Cape Town that the justice and constitutional development department further clarified the point that this “is an assessment of the impact of the judgments of the Constitutional Court on the transformation of society”. “It is also an evaluation of the impact of our jurisprudence on the democratisation process,” he told reporters. “Cabinet advises that this should not be misconstrued as an attempt to undermine the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law as entrenched in our Constitution.” Last week, the Star newspaper reported that Zuma wanted to review the Court’s powers. “We don’t want to review the Constitutional Court, we want to review its powers,” Zuma said during an interview. “It is after experience that some of the decisions are not decisions that every other judge in the Constitutional Court agrees with.” He questioned the logic of having split judgments and said judges were being influenced by the media. “How could you say that [the] judgment is absolutely correct when the judges themselves have different views about it?” Zuma told the newspaper. He said that if decisions by Parliament could be challenged, there was nothing wrong with questioning the judiciary. This has been strongly criticised from various quarters. Among others, Dene Smuts of the Democratic Alliance said Zuma would find he was on the path to a full-blown confrontation with the Constitutional Court if his remarks really “mean what they seem to mean”, because the court itself decided the constitutionality of constitutional amendments. “It is apparent from the President’s remarks that irritation with some of the court’s judgments lies at the root of the desire for review,” she said. Also last week, the Black Lawyers’ Association (BLA) said the executive and the legislature did not have the power to amend or review the Constitutional Court’s powers. “The only way... is to divorce the current constitutional democracy and remarry parliamentary sovereignty,” BLA president Pritzman Mabunda said. If this route was followed, it may be subjected to constitutional scrutiny by the Constitutional Court, which was the subject matter, he said. - Sapa
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012
Social Justice Coalition:
This session aims to highlight the role that civil society plays in our constitutional democracy. Social Justice Coalition is a community NGO that focuses on campaigning for safety and security for all. The speaker will explain why civil society is such an important democratic institution in our South African context.
Equal Education has done work on basic norms and standards, namely the ‘One Library for Each School’ Project and the ‘Campaign for Minimum Norms and Standards’. This session will examine the role that civil society plays in our constitutional democracy, the contributions that civil society organisations have made thus far, as well as the contributions that we need them to make in the future. This session will have special emphasis on the work that has been done by Equal Education within the South African context and the importance of equal education as a basic need.
Building Social Movements to advance the human rights and the Constitution.
Building Social Movements to advance the human rights and the Constitution.
The speaker has been asked to address the following questions: - What role does the SJC play in civil society? - How much does the individual vote count in order to hold government to account? The speaker has been asked to present on the following questions: - What was the SJC’s role in the Richard Mduli matter? - What does Equal Education do? - What are the challenges that civil society faces? - Democracy is that form of government where the supreme power is THE SPEAKER IS: vested in the people. Is this to be interpreted narrowly as merely af AXOLILE NOTYWALA fording the population a vote or are other institutions required to func tion healthily in order for a robust democracy to flourish?
The speaker is: YOLISWA DWANE.
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2012 DAY 3
This session emphasises the role of social movements and the role that civil society plays in advancing our constitutional democracy. This session will host the civil society group, Section27. Section27 combines research, advocacy and legal action to improve the socio-economic conditions that undermine human dignity and development.
This session aims to highlight the role that civil society plays in our constitutional democracy. The Democratic Governance & Rights Unit will explain why civil society is such an important democratic institution in the South African context and the relationship between exercising one’s vote in order to hold government to account and making use of other civil society organisations. The speaker has been asked to address the following questions:
Building Social Movements to advance the human rights and the Constitution.
The speaker has been asked to present on the following questions: - What is the relationship between exercising one’s vote in order to hold government to account and making use of other institutions? - To what extent did Section27’s involvement with the Textbook Scandal advance the role of civil society? - What does Section27 do? Why this work is important and in what ways can students get involved if they feel passionate about contribut ing to our constitutional democracy?
The speaker is: Nikki STEIN
Building Social Movements to advance the human rights and the Constitution.
- - - - -
How does civil society manage the counter-majoritarian tension involved with challenging a democratically legitimate executive or legislature? Should it be fair for the judiciary to be selected on representation, if so, to what extent and how do we balance the directives of the Executive against the needs of the Judiciary? What are the challenges that civil society faces? What does the Democratic Governance & Rights unit do, why is this work important? In what ways can students get involved if they feel passionate about contributing to our constitutional democracy?
The speakers ARE: CHRIS OXTOBY, TABETH mOSENGO, mEETALI LAIN
Prof. Henk Botha He has a BLC LLB from the University of Pretoria, LLM from the University of Columbia and LLD from the University of Pretoria. He teaches Constitutional Law at the University of Stellenbosch. He has contributed to various book; most recently: “Human dignity: constitutional right, absolute ideal, or contested value?” in M Jovanovic and I Krstic (eds) Human rights today - 60 years of the Universal Declaration (2010) “Refusal, Post-apartheid Constitutionalism, and The Cry of Winnie Mandela” in Karin van Marle (ed) Refusal, transition and post-apartheid law (2009) . “Limitations: Shared constitutional interpretation, an appropriate normative framework & hard choices” in S Woolman & M Bishop (eds) Constitutional Conversations (2008) (co-authored with Stu Woolman). He is also widely published in journals: “Equality, plurality and structural power” (2009) 25 South African Law Journal on Human Rights “Human dignity in comparative perspective” (2009) 20 Stellenbosch Law Review “Comparative law and constitutional adjudication: A South African perspective” (2007) 55 Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts der Gegenwart
Vinayak Bhardwaj He recently graduated with a Masters in Chemical Engineering, having completed an undergraduate degree in Biochemistry. His connection to issues of social justice was via his attempts to raise awareness and activism against the “quiet diplomacy” policy of the SA government towards his home country, Zimbabwe. At the time of the first draft of the Protection of Information Bill being mooted in 2010, he became aware of how deeply some aspects of the legislation resonated with some of the draconian laws introduced in Zimbabwe. This drew his into the fold of the Right2Know Campaign. Right2Kmow is a grassroots campaign that seeks to draw its inspiration and its direction from grassroots struggles to secure a more open and transparent society, holding both private and government power accountable in the exercise of democratic rights. As part of Right2Know Campaign, he has been responsible for legal research and mobilisation. He has presented Right2Know’s submissions to parliament on the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill, conducted research into the use of PAIA as a tool to hold state and private bodies accountable and lobbied for changes to legislation affecting the freedom of the press broadly understood to include both commercial print and community media. With respect to the latter, he is currently the Advocacy Coordinator of the Mail & Guardian Center for Investigative Journalism where he is additionally responsible for monitoring and evaluating efforts to digitise court records as a means of ensuring a more transparent South Africa. It must also be noted that he has recently directed and produced a documentary film on political theatre in Zimbabwe, a documentary which is in the process of editing and review for screening on Al Jazeera’s flagship programme Witness. He is also the Technical Content Editor for a grade 10 high school Life Sciences book currently being published by Siyavula education and a medical researcher supervising an Honors student doing work related to his own biology on cancer.
Adv. Goeff Budlender He had been a student activist in the 1970s. It was that experience that turned him to law. He was originally a medical student. The student activism brought him into contact with lawyers who defended them. He then went into the law, with a very clear political purpose. Why he switched to law, for the description of the ideal organisation in which to work would have been very similar to the Legal Resources Centre. Adv. Budlender was one of the founders of the Legal Resources Centre. He served as Director of the Johannesburg office and Deputy National Director, and as National Director from 1994 to 1996. He was appointed Director-General of the Department of Land Affairs, then re-joined the LRC, where he was Director of its Constitutional Litigation Unit until the end of 2004. Adv. Budlender then went into private practice and currently is still a practising Senior Counsel at the Cape Town Bar. He is one of the founders of the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR-Net). Currently co-director of the Sigrid Rausing Trust, a London-based philanthropy which supports human rights work in various parts of the world. Under Apartheid he thought of himself as a human rights lawyer because he was defending people’s rights against the State. Presently he uses the rights in the Constitution to transform society in two ways - for government which is accountable to ordinary people, and to enable people to achieve social and economic rights. He has acted as a judge of the High Court of South Africa in Johannesburg and Cape Town. In his student days he was acting President of the anti-apartheid National Union of South African Students.
Justice Edwin Cameron Justice Edwin Cameron, born in Pretoria on the 15 February 1953, was the first senior South African official to state publicly that he was living with HIV/AIDS after being inspired to act by the unjust death of Gugu Dlamini after she disclosed her status. Justice Cameron was always an excellent student, educated at Pretoria Boys High School going further to study at Stellenbosch University where he achieved a BA in Law cum laude, BA Honours in Latin cum laude and became a Lecturer in Latin and Classical Studies. Justice Cameron then studied at Keble College and achieved BA Honours and obtained the Jurisprudence Prize as well as BCL Honours. Justice Cameron also acquired the medallion for the best law graduate and a LLB cum laude at the University of South Africa. Edwin Cameron practiced at the Johannesburg bar from 1983 to 1994, and from 1986 practiced as a human rights lawyer at the University of the Witwatersrand’s Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS), where in 1989 he was awarded a personal professorship in law. Justice Cameron has written scholarly articles on the judiciary, conscription, labour and employment law, the law of trusts, AIDS and HIV, the legal rights of gays and lesbians and the legal computation of time. Apart from his memoir, Witness to AIDS (2005), he has also written books on the law of trusts, labour law and gay and lesbian lives in South Africa. In October 1994 former President Nelson Mandela appointed him an Acting Judge of the High Court to chair a Commission into illegal arms deals. He was appointed permanently to the High Court in 1995. In 1999-2000 he served for a year as an Acting Justice at the Constitutional Court. In 2000 he was appointed a Judge of Appeal in the Supreme Court of Appeal which he served as until 2008. On 31 December 2008 former President Kgalema Motlanthe appointed Justice Cameron to the Constitutional Court.
Judge Dennis Davis
Justice Arthur Chaskalson Former Chief Justice of South Africa He was appointed by President Nelson Mandela in June 1994 to be the first President of South Africa’s new Constitutional Court and was the Chief Justice of South Africa from November 2001 until his retirement in 2005. On his retirement in 2005 he was described by President Mbeki as a “giant among the architects of our democracy”. He was born in Johannesburg on 24 November 1931; he is a graduate of the University of the Witwatersrand, B Com (1952), LLB, Cum Laude (1954), was a member of the University’s football team and was selected for the Combined South African Universities football team in 1952. He was admitted to the Johannesburg Bar in May 1956 and took silk in July 1971. During his career at the Bar he appeared as counsel on behalf of members of the liberation movements in several major political trials between 1960 and 1994, including the Rivonia Trial in 1963/1964 at which Mr. Nelson Mandela and other leaders of the African National Congress were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. He also appeared as counsel in major commercial disputes. He was a member of the Judicial Service Commission from 1994 until 2005, and its chairperson from 21 November 2001 until his retirement on 31 May 2005. He was elected as an honorary member of the Bar Association of the City of New York in 1985 of the Boston Bar Association in 1991, and of the Johannesburg Bar in 2002. He was a visiting professor at Columbia University in New York, 1987 - 1988, and again in 2004.
Prof. Hugh Corder Professor Hugh Corder has been Professor of Public Law at UCT since 1987, and former Dean of the Law faculty. A graduate of the universities of Cape Town, Cambridge and Oxford, his main teaching and research interests fall within the field of Constitutional and Administrative Law, particularly judicial appointment and accountability and mechanisms to further administrative accountability. Professor Corder has been widely involved in community work since his student days, concentrating on popular legal education, race relations, human rights and the abolition of the death penalty. He served as a technical adviser in the drafting of the transitional Bill of Rights for South Africa. He has written two books and edited a further three, and has contributed many articles and chapters in books. Former Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town, Prof. Corder has been a Professor of Public Law at the university since 1987. In the early 1990s Professor Corder was a member of the Technical Committee responsible for the drafting of South Africa’s transitional bill of rights, and served as a technical adviser to the Constitutional Assembly of South Africa. He has acted as a consultant to Parliament on the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation, and on the Legislative Oversight of the Executive Professor Corder has also been actively involved in community work over the years, campaigning for popular legal education, human rights and the abolition of the death penalty. He is the author of a selection of books including Judges at Work (1984), and Empowerment and Accountability (1991).
Judge Davis has studied at the Universities of Cape Town (UCT) and Cambridge. He began teaching at UCT in 1977 and was appointed to a personal chair of Commercial Law, in 1989. Between 1991 and 1997 he was Director of the Centre for Applied Legal Studies of the University of the Witwatersrand. He held joint appointment at Wits and UCT 1995 – 1997. He was appointed a Judge of the High Court in 1998 and as President of the Competition Appeal Court in 2000. Since his appointment to the Bench, he has continued to teach constitutional law and tax law at UCT where he is an Honorable Professor of Law. Judge Davis is a member of the Commission of Enquiry into Tax Structure of South Africa and was a Technical Advisor to the Constitutional Assembly where the negotiations for South Africa’s interim and final constitutions were formulated and concluded. During the negotiations for South Africa’s new constitution, Judge Davis acted as a technical legal advisor on electoral law to the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) and on federalism at the Constitutional Assembly. He has published over one hundred articles in academic journals on a number of legal subjects including constitutional law, jurisprudence, tax, insurance law and criminology, and has co-written eight books. He hosted a TV programme, Future Imperfect which was an award winning current affairs programme between 1993-1998, and currently hosts “Judge For Yourself ” He has been a visiting lecturer/professor at the Universities of Cambridge, Florida, Toronto and Harvard.
Dr. Nicola de Jager She has her doctorate in politics doing her BA Honors and Masters at the University of Stellenbosch, and her PhD at the University of Pretoria. She specializes in Southern African politics; South African politics; comparative politics and democracy. Her research interests include one party dominant systems in developing countries, democracy and agents of accountability (political and civil society) and South African politics. Her current research projects concern a comparative study of one party dominant systems in Mexico and South Africa and the role of political parties in South Africa’s democracy. Recent publications: ‘Democracy in South Africa’s dominant party system.’ 2010. Five Volume Series titled: Political Parties and Democracy. Edited by Kay Lawson. Publisher: Praeger. ‘No “New” ANC?’ 2009. Politikon. ‘The South African government and the application of co-optive power.’ 2006. Politikon, ‘The South African-government, soft power and ideological hegemony.’ 2006. Acta Academica,. ‘The ANC, co-optive power and the perpetuation of party dominance.’ 2006. Challenges to Democracy by One-Party dominance: Seminar Report. Johannesburg: KAS. ‘Contemporary Civil Society in Africa.’ 2004. Chapter co-authored with Pierre Hugo. In State of Africa, 2003-2004. Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa.
Prof. Pierre de Vos Professor Pierre de Vos teaches in the area of Constitutional Law at UCT. He has a Bachelor of Commerce (Law), LLB and LLM (cum laude) from the University of Stellenbosch He has an LLM from Columbia University in New York, and an LLD from the University of Western Cape. He taught at the University of Western Cape from 1993 to June 2009 and held a Professorship at that institution from 2001. He received grants from the University of the Western Cape in 1998, 1995 and 2005 for research and travel. Professor de Vos is the chairperson of the Board of the Aids Legal Network and is a board member of Triangle Project. He has his own blog called Constitutionally Speaking which is visited by 600 - 1 000 people daily, including lawyers, journalists, judges and academics. He was a senior professor at the law faculty of the University of the Western Cape (UWC) before being appointed Claude Leon Foundation Chair in Constitutional Governance at the University of Cape Town (UCT) in 2009. Prof. de Vos is a favourite of the media for his outspoken opinions on the state of democracy in South Africa. He is quoted regularly in all major English and Afrikaans newspapers, as well as on television.
Keith Gottschalk Keith has a B.A. Honours in Comparative African Government and Law from the University of Cape Town. His Thesis was entitled “Apartheid v. Economics - the Dynamics of Inequality” and over twenty scholarly publications. His current research interests are on South African party politics, and the African Union. He also has a BA majoring in Comparative African Government and Law; and History from the University of Cape Town. He was an honorary NUSAS Vice-President in the 1980s; chair of the Civil Rights League when he was detained without trial and a journalist on UCT’s VARSITY during the 1960s-70s. Keith came to UWC from UCT in 1984. While head of department in 2006, he hosted the biggest SA Association of Political Studies conference - at UWC. He is a Council member of the South African Association of Political Studies. Keith also studies Space Policy, and is the only UWC academic who serves on the Advocacy Committee of the Space Affairs Council of South Africa, a statutory entity within DTI. A former political prisoner, Keith is also a published poet; his anthology is titled ‘Emergency Poems’.
Nic Swart Mr. Swart is the CEO and Director of LEAD: The Law Society of South Africa (with an annual enrollment of 12 000). He established the School for Legal Practice, which now boasts 10 branches around the country, including a distance learning model. He is a member of the SADC Lawyers Association.
ADV. Adila Hassim Advocate and director of litigation and legal services at Section27. Adila joined the ALP in 2004 and was the head of litigation and legal services from 2006 until 2010. She has a BA LLB from the former University of Natal, Durban. In 1998 she was awarded the Franklin Thomas Fellowship to pursue an LLM at St Louis University, which she completed with distinction in 1999. In 2000 she was awarded the Rev Lewers – Bradlow Foundation Fellowship to pursue her doctorate at the University of Notre Dame. The doctorate was conferred on her with honours in 2006. Her dissertation was entitled “The protection of social rights in South Africa: from theory to practice”. Adila is a member of the Johannesburg Bar and an honorary research fellow at the School of Law of the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. Most recently Adila has been appointed to the technical advisory group of the Global Commission on HIV and Law. A former law clerk to the Deputy Chief Justice Pius Langa, as well as then Acting Justice Edwin Cameron, Adila has continued passionately to defend constitutional rights, and socio-economic rights in particular. Consequences of corrupt conduct have a deterrent effect so that we may safeguard our moral integrity as a country and direct resources to the basic services for which they are intended.” Adila Hassim, a founding member of Corruption Watch, is co-founder and head of litigation and legal services at Section27, a public interest law centre that seeks to influence, develop and use the law to protect, promote and advance human rights. Section27 incorporates the Aids Law Project, where Adv. Hassim was head of litigation and legal services for several years.
Mark Heywood Mr. Heywood grew up in Nigeria, Ghana, Botswana and England. He holds a BA (Hons) in English Language and Literature from Balliol College, Oxford University. He is currently the Executive Director SECTION27. After graduating from Oxford in 1986, he worked for the Marxist Workers Tendency of the ANC, first in London and then from 1989 to 1994 in South Africa. During this time he was instrumental in setting up campaigns such as the Philemon Mauku Defence Campaign, the Leeukop Political Prisoners Support Committee and the Johannesburg Inner City Community Forum. He also did an MA in African literature at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, and lectured and wrote on the influences of Shakespeare on African writing and politics in South Africa. Mr. Heywood joined the ALP in 1994, becoming its head in 1997 and executive director in 2006. In 1998, he was one of the founders of the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC). In 2007, he was elected as deputy chairperson of the South African National AIDS Council. He is also the current chairperson of the UNAIDS Reference Group on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights. In 2009, Mr. Heywood was appointed as a member of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on National Health Insurance. Mr. Heywood has written extensively on HIV, human rights and the law, including co-editing the AIDS and the Law Resource Manual and Health & Democracy: A guide to human rights, health law and policy in post-Apartheid South Africa. He has been part of the legal teams of the ALP and TAC that have been involved in all the major litigation around HIV and human rights.
Adv. Paul Hoffman He was born in Johannesburg and completed his secondary education at nearby St. Martins School, in 1967. He completed his BA. LL.B at the University of the Witwatersrand in 1974. In 1975 he was admitted as an attorney practicing in Johannesburg. He practiced as a litigation attorney between 1975 and 1980. He was admitted as an advocate in 1980 and practiced as a junior at the Cape Bar until 1995. He took silk in 1995 and continued to practice at the Cape Bar where he headed its advocacy skills training program. Three successive Judges President of the Cape High Court invited him to grace their Bench as an Acting Judge. As a jurist, Advocate Hoffman was the Founding editor of Current Law Cassettes, and a part-time lecturer in law of contract and public international law at the University of the Western Cape. In 2006, after twenty six years of membership, he left the Cape Bar in order to take up an appointment as Director of the Centre of Constitutional Rights. Its mission to uphold the Constitution, dovetails with his personal commitment to the rule of law and the promotion of constitutional democracy. As director he wrote widely on threats to the Constitution and appeared in the Constitutional Court as amicus curiae. Since January 2009 he has been pursuing his passion for exacting accountability by setting up IFAISA (Institute for accountability in southern Africa)
DR. Marjorie Jobson Human Rights Activist, Medical Doctor, Commissioner on the CRL Commission, and Former Mentor for Mandela Rhodes Scholars Dr. Jobson is Director of Khulumani Support Group. She is also a Commissioner on the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities which is Chapter 9 Institution in the South African Constitution. Her activism is focused on the fight for human rights, women’s rights and social justice She was also co-chair to the Black Sash and held the position of Chairperson of Khulumani Support Group from 2003 – 2006. She is well learned having attended various institutions including St Olaf College Doctor of Humane Letters, University of South Africa ( Certificate in Women and the Law and Biomedical Ethics), University of Minnesota (Graduate Leadership in the Global Commons), Colleges of Medicine South Africa (Diploma in Anaesthetics), and the University of Cape Town ( Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery).
Mr. Daniels is the Chief State Law Adviser, and works closely with the Presidency in advising the Executive of the legal position of the country, both in the international forum and domestically.
DR. DAVID KLATZOW He has a Bachelor of Science with an Honours in Biochemistry. His dissertation: The Induction of Tyrosine Amino Transferase by Various Hormones. In 1978 he completed his Ph.D entitled: A Study of Plasma & Serum Proteins in Malignancy. Dr David Klatzow is an internationally recognised forensic scientist. He is an expert in the field of pyroforensics (the forensics of fire and its behaviour) and an authority on blood alcohol. Before branching out into the world of forensic science, he was a lecturer in biochemistry at the University of Durban-Westville and medical biochemistry at the University of the Witwatersrand. In 1968 he was the recipient of Ernest Oppenheimer Memorial Scholarship, while in 1976 he was the recipient of the Ernest Oppenheimer Travelling Scholarship, which was used to visit the laboratories of Professor P Emmelot in Amsterdam. In 1977 his Paper was presented at the British Society for Immunology Autumn Meeting and in 1979 he was a research Fellow in Department of Surgery at the Natal Medical School. The Project concerned the study of the effect of glycoproteins on the lymphocyte function. He is a former member of The International Association of Arson Investigations, registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientists, a former member of the Forensic Science Society of Great Britain and is registered as a Natural Scientist in terms of the Act on Natural Scientists. In 1984 he established a private forensic laboratory in Johannesburg, and currently practices in Cape Town.
Prof. Sandra Liebenberg BA LLB (UCT) LLM (University of Essex, UK) LLD (University of Witwatersrand) , and Admitted Attorney (Cape High Court). Sandra Liebenberg is the H.F. Oppenheimer Chair in Human Rights Law at the Law Faculty of the University of Stellenbosch and Co-director of the Faculty’s post-graduate research project on Combating Poverty, Homelessness and SocioEconomic Vulnerability under the Constitution. She is also Chairperson of the Board of the NGO SERI (Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa) and a member of the Advisory Board of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC). She serves on the editorial board of the South African Journal on Human Rights, the African Human Rights Law Journal, the Human Rights Law Journal and Speculum Juris. Her research focus areas are the enforcement of socio-economic rights under both the South African Constitution and under international human rights law; equality jurisprudence with particular emphasis on gender equality. She is published widely in the above fields and an editor of a book entitled, ‘The Constitution of South Africa from a Gender Perspective’. Her most recent contribution in the field of socio-economic rights includes editing and contributing an article to a special two-part edition of the journal, ‘Law Democracy & Development on Socio-Economic Rights and Transformation in South Africa’. She has also just completed an updated chapter on socio-economic rights in M Chaskalson et al (eds) Constitutional Law of South Africa.
Janet Love Janet Love has been an anti-apartheid activist since 1974 and was involved in the Trade Union movement and the ANC prior to and during the 10 years she spent in exile and, thereafter, in the four years she worked clandestinely inside South Africa as a member of the ANC Underground. From 1991 to 1994, Janet was involved in negotiations for a settlement in South Africa from the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA), through the Multi-Party Process to the establishment of the Transitional Executive Council (TEC). She was involved in the negotiation and drafting of the final Constitution of South Africa and was a member of the 22-person Constitutional Committee of the Constitutional Assembly, the body responsible for steering of the constitution-making process. She left Parliament to take up the position of Special Advisor to the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry. She has studied through both the University of the Witwatersrand and of London and has post-graduate qualifications in public administration, development management and economics. She worked in the South African Reserve Bank for five years as head of strategic analysis and support in the currency department. She took up her current position as National Director of the Legal Resources Centre in January 2006. In this capacity she is responsible for the overall management of this public interest, human rights law clinic employing up to 80 members of staff in four offices around the country. She is actively engaged in networking activities inside South Africa and abroad in the interests of achieving the human rights mission of the LRC. On 1 October 2009, Janet was appointed as a Commissioner on the South African Human Rights Commission.
ADV. Gcina Malindi He Graduated from the University of the Witswatersrand with a BA and an LLB. He is an advocate at the Johannesburg Bar. Gcina was admitted to the Bar in 1995 and took silk in 2010. He has served as an acting judge of the South Gauteng High Court and the Labour Court. He practices mainly in the fields of Labour, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law and Competition Law. He also does the drafting legal opinions and consultations to prepare cases. He has represented many high profile people including the South African President, Jacob Zuma, most notably in the case involving the controversial painting ‘The Spear’. He takes part in Activities and Societies including: South African Students Congress (SASCO), and the Law Students Council Soccer Team.
Nthabi attended Hillview High School in 2003 and matriculated in 2007. She then then pursued her tertiary education at North West University in 2008 and graduated with an LLB Law 2011. She is currently working at SECTION27 as a Research Assistant incorporating the AIDS Law Project. Ms. Pooe speaks Zulu, English, Afrikaans, Tswana and Northern Sotho. Her skills range from Research including Legal research, Public Speaking , Analysis, Editing and Litigation. She works exceptionally closely with the SLSJ National Executive Committee providing her guidance, insight and resources.
Dr. Mathole Motshekga Doctor Mathole Motshekga is the African National Congress’ Chief Whip and member of the African National Congress’ Department of Legal and Constitutional Affairs. He is a Doctor in Law who obtained the Fulbright Scholarship to complete his LLM at Harvard Law School. He is a senior lecturer in the department of criminal and procedural law and a visiting lecturer at various European universities including the Albert-Ludwigs University. He is an honorary professor at the University of Pretoria Gordon Institute of Business Science. Since 1979 he has been an attorney of the Supreme Court of South Africa. He is also a legal advisor to the National House of Traditional Leaders of SA and the national coalition of traditional leaders. He was previously Chair of the African National Congress from 1997- 2000 and a Premier of the Gauteng Provincial Government from 1998 – 1999.
Keren Ben-Zeev Keren is the Deputy Director of the Heinrich Böll Foundation Southern Africa and also manages the democracy programme. She has initiated efforts aimed at citizen ownership of democratic institutions, including discussions between key stakeholders, including parliamentarians, academics and civil society leaders on issues ranging from the role of statuary human rights organizations, to advancing pro-gender equality agendas. A key focus has been managing, designing and supporting civil society in parliamentary processes to build capacity and strengthen democracy, human rights, and gender concerns in an emerging and challenging African democracy, not only in South Africa but also in crisis situations such as Zimbabwe. Keren has an MA in Cultural Studies from the University of the Witwatersrand.
B Proc LLM (UWC) ( Constitutional Litigation)( 36 year old, mother of 2 ( 7 and 17 years) Practicing Attorney of the High Court of South Africa and Senior Lecturer/Clinician at the University of the Western Cape. Completed LLM in Constitutional Litigation in 2006. Director of the University of the Western Cape Legal Aid Clinic. The Clinic provides free legal services to indigent and marginalized persons in the Western Cape Province, South Africa, clinical legal education to final year law students, practical training to candidate attorneys from disadvantaged communities on the verge of entering the profession and back up legal services to paralegal advices offices in poor and rural communities. She is currently the President of the Association of University Legal Aid Institutions ( AULAI) which promotes the interests of University based law clinics in South Africa and a Trustee of the AULAI Trust. She has been a clinician since 2002 and completed her articles at Legal Resources Centre, where after she worked at Lawyers for Human Rights( LHR). Both organizations are human rights and public interest law firms in South Africa. Also Chairperson of the Board of Lawyers for Human Rights, Trustee of the Rural Legal Trust and current Western Cape Branch Secretary of the National Association of Democratic Lawyers. Legal expertise is in clinical legal education, promotion of access to justice of indigent persons in land, housing and tenure related. Her conference paper on the Promotion of Access to Justice by University Law Clinics ( in South Africa) was published in Legal Aid: A Human Right (2010) by the Danish Institute for Human Rights.
Justice kate O’Regan Justice O’Regan was born in Liverpool, England. She grew up in Cape Town. She obtained her B.A. from the University of Cape Town in 1978 and her LL.B. (cum laude) from the same university in 1980, an LL.M. from the University of Sydney with first class honours in 1981 and a Ph.D. from the University of London (London School of Economics) in 1988. For four years in the 1980s she practised as an attorney in Johannesburg specialising in labour law and land rights law. During this period she acted for a wide range of trade unions, anti-apartheid organisations and several communities facing the threat of evictions under apartheid land policy. In 1988, she joined the University of Cape Town Labour Law Unit as a researcher. In 1990, she became a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Law at UCT. Over the next five years, she was a founder member of both the Law, Race and Gender Research project and the Institute for Development Law at UCT. She was also an advisor to the African National Congress on land claims legislation, and to the National Manpower Commission on gender equality law. She also served as a trustee of the Legal Resources Trust. She has been awarded honorary doctorates by the University of KwaZulu-Natal (2000), the University of Cape Town (2004) and the London School of Economics and Political Science (2008). She is also an honorary bencher of Lincoln’s Inn (2007). She was the youngest judge and one of only two women to be appointed. Her 15-year term ended in 2009. Since 2008, she has served as chairperson of the United Nations’ Internal Justice Council, a body established to help ensure the independence, professionalism and accountability of the UN’s new system of internal justice as well as to identify suitable candidates to serve as judges of the UN Dispute Tribunal and Appeals Tribunal. She has been a member of the International Monetary Fund’s Administrative Tribunal since 2010 and president of the tribunal since the beginning of 2011.
DEPuTY MINISTER Andries Nel Andries Nel completed his Bachelors of Civil Law at the University of Pretoria. He is currently the Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development of the government of South Africa. From 1990 – 1994 he was the Co-ordinator for the Capital Punishment & Penal Reform Programme with Lawyers for Human Rights in Pretoria. He has since 1994 till present been a Member of Parliament and a member of the African National Congress National Executive Committee. From 2000 – 2002 he was the Whip of the National Executive Committee, Portfolio Committee on Justice for the African National Congress. He was Deputy Chief Whip of the National Executive Committee for the African National Congress from 2002 – 2008. In 2008 – 2009 he was the House Chairperson of the National Assembly of Parliament of South Africa.
Dr. Thiven Reddy He is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Cape Town. He completed his Bachelor of Social Science Honours degree at the University of Natal (Durban) and his Masters and PhD in Political Science at the University of Washington (Seattle). His areas of specialisation are Comparative Politics (Contemporary South African Politics; Politics of Dominant Party Systems) and Political Theory (Marxism; Postcolonial theory). His book ‘Hegemony and Resistance: Contesting Identities in South Africa’ (London: Ashgate Publishing, 2000) draws on the writings of Gramsci and Foucault to theorise the construction of identity in South Africa. He has published articles on political theory, South Africa’s democratic transition, and contemporary South African politics. He was awarded a Commonwealth Fellowship to Bristol University in 2001 and the Harvard/Mandela Fellowship in 2003. He teaches the postgraduate core course in Comparative Politics and the undergraduate courses, POL 218 Contemporary South African Politics and half of POL 230 Political Dynamics.
Cherith Sanger Cherith Sanger obtained her LL.B. degree from the University of the Western Cape in 2004 and her LL.M cum laude with a specialisation in Gender, Health and Human Rights from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law through the UCLA Law/ Sonke fellowship in 2012. She completed her articles of clerkship at a leading Cape Town firm, Deneys Reitz Attorneys, in 2006 and was admitted as an attorney in the Cape High Court in early 2007. Cherith practiced as an associate in Deneys Reitz’s litigation department from 2007 to mid 2008. During her employ at Deneys Reitz she became involved and increasingly interested in the firm’s public interest legal work. Pursuing her passion for human rights, and women’s rights in particular, Cherith joined the Women’s Legal Centre in 2008 where she practiced as an attorney conducting impact litigation, legal advocacy and providing legal advice in the areas of gender-based violence, labour law and land law. Cherith has authored publications aimed at informing women of their constitutional and other legal rights on housing and evictions, sexual offences and LGBTI Rights against unfair discrimination and has conducted training sessions on these topics with government departments, the private sector and other human rights and public interest organisations. Cherith is also as accredited Education, Training and Development Practitioner for purposes of learning programmes for the Law Society of South Africa and was rated one of the Mail & Guardians top 300 young South Africans in 2009 and 2010. Cherith has now taken up the Policy Advocacy and Research Manager position in Sonke’s Policy Advocacy and Research Unit. In this position, Cherith will manage and conduct policy advocacy for gender transformation and the integration of work with men and boys into law and policy and for the implementation of such policies as well as research to build onto the existing evidence base for the need for continuing work with men and boys for attaining gender equality with a view to contributing towards Sonke’s goal to reduce gender based violence, HIV infection and the impact of AIDS.
Adv. Wim Trengove Adv. Wim Trengove is regarded as one of South Africa’s highest-profile advocates. He obtained his LLB (cum laude) from the University of Pretoria in 1974, where he also obtained University colours for academic excellence, leadership and sports (water polo). Since then, he has held leading positions in the Bar, including Chairperson of the General Council of the Bar of South Africa. He was a member of the Judicial Service Commission and has served as a judge on several occasions. It is, however, as a trial advocate that he has become well-known. In addition to corporate and commercial work, he specialises in human rights and has appeared in some of the most prominent cases during the apartheid era such as those involving the Langa massacre, Dr Wendy Orr, and the death of Adv. Anton Lubowsky. Since the advent of democracy, Adv Trengove has argued some of the seminal cases decided by the Constitutional Court and other courts, including: S v Makwanyane 1995, in which the death penalty was held to be unconstitutional. Adv. Trengove is also an honorary professor at the universities of Rhodes and Cape Town.
Speaker: Meetali Jain Community Legal Aid Society, Inc. (CLASI) is a private, non-profit law firm dedicated to equal justice for all. We provide civil legal services to members of our community who have low incomes, disabilities or who are age 60 and over. Our services help our clients to become safe and self-sufficient. CLASI was born when Collins J. Seitz and William Poole, members of the Delaware State Bar Association, established Legal Aid Society of Delaware in 1946 to provide free legal assistance to the poor. The initial focus was on family court matters and obtaining benefits for World War II veterans under the G.I. Bill. Legal Aid became a United Way agency in the 1950’s. Its case load shifted to mostly real property, landlord-tenant and debt cases. The number of cases handled steadily increased and in 1966, Legal Aid collaborated with Community Action of Greater Wilmington to obtain a grant from the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to form Community Law Service, which focused on anti-poverty services. Community Law Service and Legal Aid operated separately until 1971, when they merged to form CLASI. In 1977, CLASI started the Senior Citizens Legal Assistance Program (SCLAP) (the predecessor to today’s Elder Law Program) and the Developmental Disabilities (DD) Program. The governor designated CLASI as Delaware’s Protection and Advocacy System for Delawareans with developmental disabilities. Brian Hartman took charge of the DD program in 1977 and has remained its leader ever since By 2006, CLASI employed 24 attorneys and a total staff of 58. Although CLASI’s funding and staffing levels have been adversely affected by the recession, declines in funding have happened before in CLASI’s history, and CLASI remains dedicated to providing free civil (non-criminal) legal services to eligible low-income Delawareans, and confident that it will return to prior staffing levels as the economy recovers. CLASI continues to maintain offices in New Castle, Kent and Sussex Counties and to collaborate with other non-profit agencies, state and local governments and the community to help our clients improve their lives in a meaningful and lasting way.
Speaker: Yoliswa dwane Our Vision is for quality and equal education for every person in South Africa. Equal Education is a movement of learners, parents, teachers and community members working for quality and equality in South African education, through analysis and activism. EE is a community and membership-based organisation. It advocates for quality and equality in the South African education system and engages in evidence-based activism for improving the nation’s schools. It is a leader in youth leadership development. EE’s campaigns, based on detailed research and policy analysis, are aimed at achieving quality education for all. We promote the rights to equality and education, with the firm belief that these will enable the poor and working classes to an equal opportunity in life. Education is an end in itself. Also, education helps one to understand and demand the full realisation of the rights enshrined in the Constitution. Led by young activists, EE seeks to improve the poor quality of education in South Africa by working together with communities, schools, teachers, principals, learners, parents, academics, researchers and the government. We build an understanding of the educational system, whilst drawing attention to problems faced by schools and their communities. Equipped with this knowledge, EE offers a new way for people to participate in the democratic system and bring change to education and society.
SpeakerS: Chris Oxtoby and Tabeth Masengu The DGRU is an applied research unit within the Public Law Department at the University of Cape Town. It was established very recently in order for the faculty, and UCT more generally, to have a greater influence on democracy and human rights in South Africa and the region. The DGRU is primarily concerned with the relationship between rights and governance. Its work focuses on the intersection between public administration, with the challenge of public accountability, on the one hand, and the realization of constitutionallyenshrined human rights on the other. This is distinctive from other institutes or University centres. Based in the Department of Public Law at the University of Cape Town, the DGRU’s mission is to advance the principles and practice of constitutional democracy in Africa. Recognising the gap between the promise of constitutionalism and the reality of daily life for the majority of Africans, the DGRU aims to stimulate fresh thinking on the intersection between rights and transformative governance. In collaboration with others, the DGRU supports the process of law and policy reform, and informs public debate, through inter-disciplinary research and advocacy. The Vision for the future is that in ten years time, the DGRU will have a strong international reputation as a place where bold new ideas are born and then turned into working practice, providing a stimulating environment for policy-makers, academic thinkers and students alike, and an intellectual bridge between Europe and Africa on some of the most significant public law issues that face modern societies everywhere.
Speaker: Nikki Stein SECTION27 was established in May 2010 and is named after section 27 of the South African Constitution, which lies at the heart of our supreme law’s commitment to socio-economic rights. It incorporates the AIDS Law Project, one of South Africa’s most successful post-apartheid human rights organisations. SECTION27 is a public interest law centre that seeks to influence, develop and use the law to protect, promote and advance human rights. Our activities include research, advocacy and legal action to change the socio-economic conditions that undermine human dignity and development, prevent poor people from reaching their full potential and lead to the spread of diseases that have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable and marginalised people. With the increase in the breadth of the work of the ALP, it made sense to form a new organisation to succeed the ALP that was structured for our new focus. SECTION27 seeks to contribute towards the progressive realisation of socio-economic rights, with a particular focus on the right of access to healthcare services, the positive and negative obligations the Constitution places on public and private bodies, and the legal and political conditions necessary for sustaining rights under the rule of law. In our view, HIV/AIDS will remain the litmus test for the delivery of health services over the coming years: for example, the epidemic poses major issues in respect of appropriate budgeting and expenditure. It therefore offers an entry point for tackling the systemic problems that confront the health system. Consequently SECTION27, with our partners, will continue with activities that aim to promote the HIV/AIDS National Strategic Plan, strengthen the South African National AIDS Council and defend and realise existing policy and established rights.
DON’T BE SAD IT’S OVER, BE GLAD IT BEGAN NAME
Speaker: Axolile Notwala On the 16th June 2008 a diverse group of individuals from the Cape Town community who had come together in the Civil Society response to the xenophobia crisis decided to form the Social Justice Coalition. We were concerned about the lack of political leadership in our government and its institutions which were once again highlighted by this humanitarian crisis. We believe that the economic and social inequalities that ravage our society and continent have fed a deepening anger amongst the poor and marginalised. This has led to an explosion of crime, including xenophobia, hate crimes and gender-based violence. The xenophobic crisis gave us the impetus to form a movement to protest against the failure of the government regarding service delivery, accountability and the associated attacks on the Constitution and Judiciary. The SJC is today one of South Africa’s newest and fastest growing mass-member based social movements campaigning for safe, healthy and dignified communities in some of South Africa’s largest, most under-developed and dangerous townships. The SJC’s main focus area is Khayelitsha (in Cape Town) – home to approximately 700 000 people, most of whom live in shacks made of wood and metal sheeting. With 11 active branches and over 40 partner organisations, the SJC promotes active citizenship through education, policy and research, and community organising to ensure government is accountable, open and responsive. The SJC is currently engaged in two primary campaigns – The Clean and Safe Sanitation Campaign and the Justice and Safety for All Campaign. It also participates in broader campaigns to combat hate crimes (most notably homophobia and xenophobia), prevent corruption, and protect the supremacy of the Constitution and rule of law.