SAFLII [Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback]

South African Law Commission

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South African Law Commission >> Report >> 1999_3 >> ANNEXURE D

[Database Search] [Name Search] [Previous] [Next] [Download] [Help]

ANNEXURE D

LIST OF RESPONDENTS WHO RESPONDED IN WRITING

  1. Mr RE Laue, Magistrate Durban;
  2. Mr PKM Retief: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism;
  3. Mr JM Paley: Durban Metro: Legal Services Department;
  4. Mr BC Harker;
  5. Mr Andrew Henderson: Attorney, High Court of South Africa;
  6. Ms Hazel Bowen: National President: South African Association of Women Graduates;
  7. Prof TW Bennett: Head of the Department of Public Law: University of Cape Town;
  8. Advocate Seth Abrahams;
  9. National Department of Sport and Recreation;
  10. Judge Roger Errera, Conseil D’Etat, France;
  11. Mr Justice Landman, Labour Court, Johannesburg;
  12. Mr Philip Harrison, Director of Research, Australian Administrative Review Council;
  13. Mr Rainer Pfaff: German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH;
  14. Prof Dr J Schwarze: Institute for Public Law, Albert Ludwigs University, Freiburg, Germany;
  15. Prof Dr J Frohwein: University of Heidelberg, Germany;
  16. Mr LR Norval: The South African Institute of Chartered Accountants;
  17. Prof XJ Philippe: University of Aix-Marseilles, seconded to the University of the Western Cape;
  18. Mr PJ Birkinshaw;
  19. Ms Patricia Martin: Black Sash Trust: National Office;
  20. Prof Stan Sangweni: Public Service Commission;
  21. M Bham: Northern Province Legal Services;
  22. Mrs E Raubenheimer: Technicon SA;
  23. Ms PJ O’Connor: Public Accountants’ and Auditors’ Board;
  24. Mr Ailwei Mulaudzi: Department of Public Works;
  25. Mr Paul Gray: The Cape Environmental Trust;
  26. Ms Marie-Lou Roux: Habitat Council;
  27. Mr G Roos: Province of KwaZulu-Natal: Department of Local Government and Housing;
  28. Ms Victoria Mayer: South African Human Rights Commission;
  29. Mr CH Paxton: Department of Correctional Services;
  30. Mr M Rangata: Department of Labour;
  31. Mr RE Robertson; Dean: Faculty of Law: University of Fort Hare;
  32. Mrs L Garlipp: Department of Water Affairs & Forestry;
  33. Mr J Klaaren: Faculty of Law and Centre for Applied Legal Studies: University of the Witwatersrand;
  34. Ute Klamert: GTZ: Provincial Administration Programme;
  35. Ms Sandra Liebenberg: Community Law Centre University of the Western Cape;
  36. Judge WH Heath: Heath Special Investigating Unit;
  37. Advocate Gilbert Marcus SC: Society of Advocates of SA: Johannesburg Bar Council;
  38. Advocate C Maré, State Law Advisor, Western Cape Provincial Administration;
  39. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut (Afrikaans Chamber of Commerce);
  40. Prof Dawid van Wyk: Department of Public Law: University of South Africa;
  41. Free State Local Government Association;
  42. Mr G Budlender: Director-General: Department of Land Affairs;
  43. Mr Ken Morrison, Ms Marissa Jacobs, Ms Shereen Ebrahim and Liesl Gerntholtz: Commission on Gender Equality;
  44. Mr Peter Leon, Attorneys Webber Wentzel Bowens;
  45. Mr Les Barchard: Cape Metropolitan Council;
  46. IBA;
  47. Ms Justine White and Ms Lisa Thornton: Edward Nathan Friedland Attorneys on behalf of the South African Telecommunications Regulatory Authority;
  48. Advocate AL Becker: The Investigating Directorate: Serious Economic Offences;
  49. Dr CP du Plessis: Western Cape Local Government Association;
  50. Mr HP Rademeyer: National Department of Agriculture;
  51. Advocate PC van der Bijl SC: The General Council of the Bar of South Africa;
  52. Mr Jeets Hargovan: Mpumalanga Provincial Government;
  53. Mr J Kirkland: State Law Adviser Eastern Cape;
  54. Mr Johann Nortjé: The Legal Department South African Police Service: Western Cape;
  55. The Chief Directorate: Legislation Development: Department of Justice;
  56. The Judicial Officers’ Association of South Africa.

ADDENDUM TO ANNEXURE D

CHART INDICATING AREAS OF SPECIFIC COMMENT TO WHICH RESPONDENTS COMMENTED

Key to definitions clause as contained in the Bill proposed in Discussion Paper 81:

Clause 1(e) defined “court”; clause 1(l) defined “qualified litigant”, clause 1(m) defined “rules” and 1(o) defined standards

Respondent
clse1
clse 2
clse 3
clse 4
clse 5
clse 6
clse 7
clse 8
clse 9
clse 10
clse 11
clse 12
clse 13
clse 14
clse 15
clse 16
clse 17
clse 18
clse 19
clse 20
clse 21
clse 22
clse 23
clse 24
clse 25
1. Magistrate Laue
1(e)

X






X



X







2. Environmental Affairs & Tourism




X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3. Durban Metro
1(a)
1(m)
1(o)


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X





4. Mr Harker











X











5. Mr A Henderson
X























6. SA Association of Women Graduates
























7. Prof Bennett











X











8. Seth Abrahams


X




















9. Dept of Sport & Recreation
X






X
X
X
X
X











10. Judge Roger Errera
1(a)(i) 1(l)


X
X

X

X
X
X

X






11. Judge Landman
1(e)























12. Philip Harrison















X

X
X


13. R Pfaff



X
X










X






14. Prof Schwarze


X




















15. Prof Frohwein



X



















16. SA Institute of Chartered Accountants
1(e)


X










X







17. Prof Philippe
1(m) 1(o)

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X






18. PJ Birkinshaw


X


X

X













19. Black Sash
1(a)
1(e)
1(m)
1(o)

X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X






20. Public Service Commission











X


X







21. Northern Prov Legal Services



X







X










22. Mrs E Raubenheimer
1(e)


X



















23. Public Accountants’ & Auditors’ Board
1 (b)
(ii)
1(a)
1(m)

X
X


X
X
X


X








24. Dept of Public Works
























25. Cape Environment Trust
























26. Habitat Council
















X






27. KZN Dept of Local Government & Housing
1(a)

X




X
X
X
X
X
X

X






28. SA Human Rights Commission
1(a)
1(m)
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
29. Dept of Correctional Services
1(m)
X





X















30. Dept of Labour
X






















31. Mr RE Robertson
























32. Dept of Water Affairs and Forestry
1(m)
1(o)
X
X
X
X



X
X
X
X









33. Mr J Klaaren
1(a)
1(m)
1(e)
X
X
X


X
X
X
X

X
X








34.Ute Klamert: GTZ





X
X
X




X

X






35. Community Law Centre UWC



X





X













36. Judge WH Heath
1(e)

X
X
X

















37. Society of Adv of SA: Jhb Bar Council


X
X
X

















38. Adv Maré: Western Cape Provincial Government
1(a)(i)
1(e)
1(m)
1(l)
1(o)
X
X
X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X


39. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut


X
X
X
X

X
X


X







40. Prof D van Wyk


X
X










X
X


X
X
X
41. Free State Local Government Association
1(a)
1(m)
1(o)







X
X
X
X
X
X









42. Dept of Land Affairs
1(m)
1(o)







X
X
X
X
X
X









43. Commission on Gender Equality



X
X
X








X







44. Peter Leon
1(a)
1(e)

X
X
X

X















45. Cape Town Municipality
1(a)
1(m)
1(o)

X



X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X








46. IBA


X
X



X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X





47. South African Telecommuni-cations Regulatory Authority
1(o)


X



X
X
X
X
X
X
X








48. Western Cape Local Government Organisation
1(a)
1(m)
1(o)

X



X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X








49. Investigating Directorate: Serious Economic Offences
1(a)
X

X
X






X









50. Department of Agriculture







X
X
X
X












51. General Council of Bar of South Africa
1(a)
1(e)
1(l)
1(m)
1(o)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X





52. Mpumalanga Provincial Government
1(a)
1(e)
X
X
X
X

X


X
X

X



X

53. Mr J Kirkland
1(a)
1(l)
X
X
X



















54. SA Police Service: Western Cape
1(a)
1(l)
1(m)

X










X








55. Department of Justice



X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X



X

Respondent

Additional comments
1. Laue
Linked to section 33(3) constitutional imperative are item s16(6)(a) & (b) of schedule 6 of the Constitution. Any extension of the constitutional jurisdiction of magistrates’ courts should result in extension of their power to review administrative action.
3. Durban Metro
Introduce procedural framework for legislative powers assigned by central government to provincial or local government and from provincial to local government.
4. Harker
Include common law principles and add of criminal sanctions, and note clauses in contracts which violate individual freedoms and rights.
6. SA Association of Women Graduates
Make provision for the inclusion of Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the establishment of an Administrative Review Board.
16. R Pfaff
Make provision for internal appeals.
17. Prof Schwarze
Make provision for internal control mechanisms.
18. Prof Frohwein
Make provision for internal control mechanisms.
19. Black Sash
Establish non-litigious, internal complaint resolution mechanisms, construct a body of concrete principles and procedures to be complied with by administrative bodies. The Bill fails to deal with delegation of authority. Application cases should be dealt with as an independent category of administrative action as so far as the right to a hearing is concerned.
20. Public Service Commission
One cannot ignore the overlap of functions in the absence of co-ordination between the Administrative Review Council and the Public service Commission. How does one minimise the possible overlap and duplication? All internal remedies should be exhausted before resorting to the provisions of the Bill. Will the possibility of instituting independent and specialised tribunals to hear and determine appeals include that of appeals emanating from misconduct and inefficiency?
25. Cape Environment Trust
Establish an Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
26. Habitat Council
Establish an Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
27. KZN Dept of Local Government & Housing
The Bill should provide for the recognition of existing specialist tribunals with a proven track record subject to certain criteria.
29. Dept of Correctional Services
Make provision that a person must exhaust all internal remedies provided by other statutes before making use of procedures envisaged in the Bill.
31. Mr RE Robertson
Make provision for tribunal of legal experts which does not involve legal costs for complainants.
33. Mr J Klaaren
Identify topics such as provision for advisory committees, review of administrative regulations by parliamentary committees, institutional complaint mechanisms, and review of administrative action by the President’s Office and start debate. Perhaps the Bill should contain a list of topics to be researched and legislation to be drafted by the Administrative Review Council.
34.Ute Klamert: GTZ
Make provision for a internal review process
37. Community Law Centre UWC
Make provision for non-litigious fora and external appeal procedures. There is large potential for creating linkages
36. Judge WH Heath
Supports a wide right of appeal against administrative action. Provision must be made for new evidence which can be presented by either parties and/or called by the Presiding Officer. This is a specialised part of the law and special courts should be created to entertain these matters. The legislation is going to lead to a very large number of applications. The present courts will not be able to deal with the applications and this will lead to long delays which will effectively lead to non-protection of the fundamental rights for which protection is sought.
38. Adv Maré: Western Cape Provincial Government
Consider the limitation of the fundamental right to just administrative action.
39. Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut
A clause should be included in the Bill confirming that the provisions of the Bill do not minimise the constitutional rights enumerated in sections 33(1) and (2) of the Constitution. Concern is expressed that the effect of the Bill on relevant judgments, eg the Traub case, have not been addressed in the Bill.
42. Dept of Land Affairs
Give consideration to an incremental legislative process for a period of say 5 years, introducing the core requirements of administrative justice. Which exceptions, if any, apply to Cabinet matters. There must be a great deal of international learning on these latter matters, should be dealt with in the Bill, made available by the Commission and recommendations be made on them. There would seem to be a good deal of overlap between the Open Democracy Bill and the Administrative Justice Bill and there would seem to be a need for the harmonisation of the two Bills. The way in which the principles involved in the Bill are translated into it should be the subject of a searching examination of their practical effect, if they are not to become another example of the finest intentions going awry in the implementation.
50. Investigating Directorate: Serious Offences
Various Acts (eg the Income Tax Act, the National prosecuting Authority Act, etc) make provision for confidentiality regarding information gathered in the course of the activities of various State organs. The breach o this confidentiality is often a criminal offence, and punishable as such.
Serious consideration should be given should be given to the question of what affect the proposed Bill will have on administrative action taken by State organs due to confidential information gleaned during the course of investigations.
55. SA Police Service: Western Cape
An internal review/appeal procedure will facilitate/prevent a floodgate of litigation. The courts should be the last recourse. The absence of internal review/appeal structures in the Bill will most definitely limit/restrict the nature and extent of a person’s right to fair administrative action as access to litigation is unaffordable to the majority of people in this country.

SAFLII: | | Terms of Use | Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/za/other/zalc/report/1999/3/1999_3-ANNEXURE-4.html