Legal threats emerge over Bela Act proclamation

The proclamation of the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act is not rational and it was a “political consideration” which swayed the president to sign sections four and five of the Bill, according to lobby groups opposed to the Act.

Solidarity’s Werner Human said yesterday: “In letters, we request the president to provide reasons – in terms of the Administrative Justice Act – within 10 days why the proclamation notice [to implement Bela Act in its entirety] was signed.

“We believe the signing of this notice on the basis of all the work we have done for three months and before would be irrational and reviewable.”

‘Irrational and reviewable’

AfriForum, Solidarity, and the Solidarity Support Centre for Schools have given Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube and President Cyril Ramaphosa 10 days to resolve the dispute or they will challenge it legally.

AfriForum CEO Kallie Kriel said the proclamation was irrational. “We think it is irrational and unreasonable to sign a proclamation like this. That’s the legal stance we are taking.”

ALSO READ: AfriForum, Solidarity give Gwarube and Ramaphosa 10 days to resolve Bela Act dispute

Kriel said Ramaphosa had been pressured by the ANC, trade unions and other groupings.

“He bowed to that pressure. It wasn’t the facts, reasons, or the law before him. It’s unfortunate that pressure groups can force the president to undermine the interests and cultural survival of a community.”

The organisations said Gwarube also acted irrationally by signing the promulgation notice.

Gwarube acted irrationally

The president assented to the Bela Bill in September last year, but left out Sections 4 and 5 which were of concern to the groups. But in December he signed a Presidential Proclamation for Bela to be implemented in full.

Ramaphosa also instructed Gwarube to do what is necessary within law to ensure regulations setting out the norms and standards are prepared.

ALSO READ: Full implementation of Bela Act bruises DA’s ego

However, Kriel said what Ramaphosa had said during his announcement was not reflected in the proclamation published in the Government Gazette on 26 December, 2024.

“The Gazette simply stated that the Act is being promulgated. That creates serious dangers. There’s nothing in it about not implementing the Act until norms and standards are developed. This opens the door for certain officials and politicians at the provincial level to abuse their power and take decisions in the absence of clear guidelines and standards,” he claimed.

The letters were served on the president and the minister on Wednesday, demanding reasons for signing the Act. “We cannot have this Act implemented without proper norms and standards in place.

Demanding reasons for signing Bela Act

“That’s also why it’s irrational. The minister of basic education, in her recommendations to the president, stated that sufficient norms and standards do not exist.

“To promulgate the Act in the absence of these norms and standards is irrational,” said Kriel.

ALSO READ: Gwarube takes charge of Bela Act amid Sadtu criticism

Human said this was the appropriate time to challenge the Act, as the proclamation did not reflect what was agreed with Solidarity at the National Economic Development and Labour Council

“There was no way we could have brought a court action to prevent him signing the proclamation.

“The reason is that it is not the role of the courts to direct the president on how to exercise his discretion. We are only able to challenge a decision already made.

Not role of courts to direct president on how to exercise his discretion

“The proclamation notice of the president is, in effect, an administrative action. Once it is exercised, it must satisfy legal requirements, and what we rely on is reasonableness and rationality, and it must pass those tests.”

Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said they would respond to the litigation papers.

ALSO READ: Bela Act: ANC’s Potgieter says Gwarube ‘can’t decide what law to implement‘

“We are comfortable the Act meets constitutional muster and the process leading to the signing of the Act was conducted in accordance with the constitution.”