Did SA bend BEE rules for Elon Musk's Starlink? Ramaphosa says no
President Cyril Ramaphosa denied relaxing BBBEE to benefit South African-born tech billionaire Elon Musk after his visit to the US.
Image: Presidency
President Cyril Ramaphosa has again poured cold water on claims that South Africa proposed relaxing its black empowerment rules solely for Elon Musk's Starlink, despite the move coming days after his meeting with US President Donald Trump last month.
'Our visit to the United States did not focus on issues of Black Economic Empowerment,' Ramaphosa told Parliament on Wednesday afternoon.
'It focused on resetting the relationship with the United States and ensuring that we continue open conversations with our major trading partners.'
He was responding to a question from Nicholaas Hendricks Pienaar of the Democratic Alliance (DA) in Limpopo.
Pienaar asked whether the Government of National Unity (GNU) should revise Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) policies to attract more international investment and stimulate economic growth and job creation.
Ramaphosa reiterated the government's commitment to economic transformation.
'Our commitment to black economic empowerment, as expressed through various policy documents and statements, remains steadfast,' he said.
'Through the Statement of Intent signed by various parties in the GNU, we are committed to translating the values of our Constitution into reality - particularly social justice, redress, and equity.'
Last month, IOL News reported that, just days after a high-level meeting at the White House, attended by South African billionaire Johann Rupert and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the South African government appeared to be easing regulations to facilitate the entry of Starlink, Musk's satellite internet service.
The alleged shift in policy has sparked debate over the influence of global business elites on national legislation and whether diplomatic lobbying is steering South Africa's tech and telecommunications framework.
Rupert, citing rising crime and economic stagnation, called for Starlink's launch to be fast-tracked.
'We need Starlink in South Africa,' he said.
Meanwhile, Ramaphosa pointed to the Constitution's Equality Clause as a foundation for transformation policies like BBBEE.
'There are a number of measures that the Equality Clause calls on us to embark on - legislative measures to protect or advance persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination,' he said.
He emphasised that the BEE Act remains a central lever for inclusive, sustainable growth.
'We must dispense with the false notion that we must choose between transformation and growth,' Ramaphosa said.
'Black economic empowerment is not only compatible with investment and growth - it is essential to achieving broad-based prosperity.'
Ramaphosa added that BEE should not be seen as a project for a select few.
'It must be a national project. Everyone, including those who benefited under apartheid, must be involved,' he said.
'Failing to do so risks economic stagnation.'
In a follow-up question, Pienaar asked Ramaphosa if he would support foreign investments like Starlink without requiring a 30% ownership stake for local partners.
However, Ramaphosa responded by pointing to the country's equity-equivalent model, which allows foreign companies that cannot meet direct ownership requirements to instead contribute to transformation initiatives.
'For offshore-based companies with global ownership structures, we've come up with an innovative, equity-equivalent solution,' Ramaphosa said.
'They embark on initiatives that support transformation and get involved in economic development without handing over equity. And many have embraced this approach.'
He added that while South Africa is not unique in requiring local ownership, it may be the only country offering a flexible equity-equivalent system - which many multinational companies have welcomed.
'We are not averse to coming up with good solutions, so long as there is commitment to transformation,' Ramaphosa said. 'That, to us, is not negotiable.'
He reiterated the historical rationale for transformation policies.
'Our economy was structured for the benefit of a white minority,' he said.
'They passed laws to exclude others, even from menial jobs. We are turning the tables. We want all South Africans to benefit, not just a few.'
[email protected]
IOL Politics
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Eight reported dead, more than 400 injured after protests erupt in Kenya
Kenyan rights body says eight deaths have been reported while hundreds are injured, including from bullet wounds, in anti-government protests marking the anniversary of bloody anti-tax bill demonstrations last year. At least eight people died and 400 were injured during nationwide anti-government protests in Kenya on Wednesday, a year after deadly demonstrations against a tax bill, the national rights watchdog said. Thousands of Kenyans took to the streets to commemorate last year's demonstrations, in which more than 60 people died, with police firing tear gas and water cannon to disperse them in the capital Nairobi, according to local media and a Reuters witness. Some protesters clashed with police, and the government-funded Kenya National Commission on Human Rights (KNCHR) said late on Wednesday that eight deaths had been reported across the country, all 'allegedly from gunshot wounds'. 'Over 400 casualties have been reported, including demonstrators, police officers and journalists,' KNCHR said in a statement shared on its official X account. The watchdog did not say who had shot the victims, noting heavy police deployment and 'allegations of excessive use of force, including rubber bullets, live ammunition and water cannon, resulting in numerous injuries'. Kenyan police spokesperson Muchiri Nyaga did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the KNCHR statement. An official at the capital's main Kenyatta National Hospital said the facility had received dozens of wounded people, '107 admitted, most with gunshot injuries', the source said, referring to rubber bullets and live rounds. He said no deaths had been reported at the hospital. National electricity provider Kenya Power said one of its security guards was shot dead during the protests while patrolling its headquarters in Nairobi. Large crowds were seen earlier heading in the direction of State House, the president's official residence, in scenes broadcast by Kenyan channel NTV before it and another broadcaster, KTN, were pulled off the air after defying an order to stop live broadcasts of the demonstrations. 'We have been switched off from all the signal broadcasters, now we are only live on YouTube and the website,' a senior official at NTV's parent Nation Media Group told Reuters. Both channels resumed broadcasts later on Wednesday after a court in Nairobi suspended the order issued by the Communications Authority of Kenya. The communications authority's order was condemned by the Kenya Editors Guild, which called it 'a gross violation of the Constitution.' Anger against police Protesters torched court facilities in Kikuyu town on the outskirts of Nairobi, Citizen TV reported. Flames and thick smoke billowed from the court building in a video posted on the broadcaster's X account. Isolated clashes were reported in the port city of Mombasa, according to NTV, with protests also in the towns of Kitengela, Kisii, Matuu and Nyeri. Although last year's protests faded after President William Ruto withdrew proposed tax hikes, public anger has remained over the use of excessive force by security agencies, with fresh demonstrations this month over the death of a blogger in police custody. Six people, including three police officers, were charged with murder on Tuesday over the killing of 31-year-old blogger and teacher, Albert Ojwang. All have pleaded not guilty. Ojwang's death has become a lightning rod for Kenyans still mourning those who perished in last year's demonstrations, blamed on security forces, against a backdrop of dozens of unexplained disappearances. 'We are fighting for the rights of our fellow youths and Kenyans and the people who died since June 25 … we want justice,' Lumumba Harmony, a protester, told Reuters in Nairobi. The unprecedented scenes on 25 June 2024, showing police firing at protesters as they broke through barriers to enter parliament, created the biggest crisis of Ruto's presidency and sparked alarm among Kenya's international allies. DM
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
GNU remains committed to transformation agenda, says Ramaphosa
Taking questions in the National Council of Provinces on Wednesday, President Cyril Ramaphosa was bullish about the Government of National Unity's commitment to transformation. President Cyril Ramaphosa says while parties in the Government of National Unity (GNU) may differ on certain policy issues, 'the fundamental commitment to the GNU's transformational agenda remains in place. 'At a broader level, through the Statement of Intent, which was signed by various parties as part of the Government of National Unity, we are committed to translate the values of our Constitution into focus — particularly with regard to the achievement of social justice, redress and equity. That is what we all signed up for when we entered into the Government of National Unity,' Ramaphosa told delegates in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) on Wednesday, 25 June. He was responding to a question from the DA's Nicolaas Pienaar on whether, with reference to his recent working visit to the United States, he conceded that the GNU had to rework its Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) policies to attract more international investment. Ramaphosa said Pretoria's visit to the US had not focused on BEE. But not before poking fun at the Oval Office meeting with US President Donald Trump, in which Trump dimmed the lights to show a video splicing EFF leader Julius Malema's rendition of 'Dubul' Ibhunu' and AfriForum's white-cross farm protests to 'prove' his false claims of a genocide in SA. 'I would've thought that we would not be making any reference to the United States, but, be that as it may, I'm rather pleased that the lights here have not been dimmed, because any act of dimming lights continues to worry me,' said Ramaphosa. He continued: 'Our visit to the United States did not focus on issues of Black Economic Empowerment. It focused on resetting our relationship with the United States and ensuring that we continue to open conversations with our major trading partners, and our commitment to Black Economic Empowerment — as expressed through various policy documents and statements — remains steadfast.' The issue of BEE has once again become increasingly prominent for reasons involving the Trump administration's focus on SA's transformation policies and the recent publication of a B-BBEE policy direction that could allow Elon Musk's Starlink internet service provider to operate in the country without ceding ownership. At the same time, the DA, a GNU partner and SA's second-largest party, is challenging section 15A of the Employment Equity Amendment Act in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, arguing it violates section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race. The DA's legal challenges to key pieces of legislation the ANC believes will further transformation, such as the Employment Equity Act, National Health Insurance, the Expropriation Act and the Basic Laws Amendment Act, have highlighted divisions within the GNU. Last month, Ramaphosa defended South Africa's redress policies in Parliament, arguing it was not BEE holding South Africa's economy back but exclusive ownership. Transformation should be seen as a 'national project' Echoing his previous comments, Ramaphosa on Wednesday said that SA needn't choose between transformation and economic growth. 'We must dispense with the false notion that we must make a choice between transformation and growth. Black Economic Empowerment is not only compatible with investment and growth, but is essential to the achievement of broad-based growth, as well as prosperity. It must be seen as a process through which we take measures — direct measures — to bring those who were excluded from economic activity into the economic mainstream. 'To think that it will happen on its own, when in the past measures were taken — including laws [that] were passed to ensure that only a minority benefits — we would be deceiving ourselves,' he said. Ramaphosa said that although the government had made progress on transformation 'across a range of measures, … we can do better. 'As with any other policy, we must constantly assess whether we are achieving our goals and whether we are making the improvements that we wanted. 'Various departments in our government, including the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition, are continuing to review the various measures that are in place, to align these with the priorities of our government in ensuring that we have industrialisation, inclusive growth and also that we facilitate access to finance for emerging black-owned and managed enterprises,' he said. Transformation, he said, should be seen 'as a national project'. 'It should never be seen as a project that belongs to just a few amongst us. All of us must be involved in this, including those who benefited under the previous system. They must be seen to be actively involved in advancing the system of all, because failing to do so could lead to lack of growth in our economy — it could lead to reversals. So all hands — black and white — must be on deck to promote transformation in our country, to enable all South Africans to play a role in the economy of their country,' he said. Starlink deal In an appearance before Parliament last month, following his department's publication of the policy direction that could significantly alter the way SA regulates empowerment in the information and communication technology sector, Communications and Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi maintained the direction was not giving Starlink 'special dispensation'. The proposed direction provides communications licence applicants with a workaround to a rule in the Electronic Communications Act that requires licence-holders to be 30% owned by historically disadvantaged groups. Musk has previously criticised SA's ownership laws ad nauseam. This is the main barrier that has prevented Starlink from applying for a licence to operate in South Africa, as it does not comply with the rule, according to a News24 report. Malatsi faced backlash from several MPs, who called for the withdrawal of the proposal, which has been published for public comment. On Wednesday, Ramaphosa said that as far as he was concerned, Malatsi had not violated any of the country's laws in publishing the policy direction. 'There are going to be hearings — there are going to be public hearings — where our people will make inputs on the efficacy of what he has announced. What he has announced is very much in line with our laws. There is no violation as far as he's concerned and as far as I'm concerned with regard to our laws, and it's not specifically aimed at one or any company,' said Ramaphosa. He said the policy direction was aimed at ensuring that those who wanted to participate in this process 'may find greater ease to do so', and it was also aimed at 'synchronising that communications [legislation]' with other laws. DM
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Socioeconomic rights in the Constitutional Court — taking stock at 30
Chief Justice, it is a great honour to be invited to deliver these reflections on the Court's role in enforcing socioeconomic rights at such a historical milestone in the Court's illustrious history. I will focus on three main themes: (1) the significance of including socioeconomic rights as justiciable fundamental rights in the Constitution; and (2) the impact of the Court's socioeconomic jurisprudence; and (3) the model of review it has developed for adjudicating these rights. I will conclude with some general remarks on the Court's role against the background of the challenges of poverty and inequality that continue to blight our society. The significance of including socioeconomic rights as justiciable rights in the Constitution The integration of both civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights, including land rights in the Bill of Rights, was a response to the nature of the oppression experienced by black people under successive colonial and apartheid regimes. Political, social, economic and cultural repression were closely intertwined and mutually reinforcing. The denial of the right to vote of the black majority was accompanied by the dispossession of their land, the destruction of their traditional livelihoods and systemic discrimination in their access to housing, health care, food, water, social security and education. Resistance was met with increased violations of civil and political rights, including killings, torture, banning and detentions without trial. Freedom from all forms of oppression – political, civil, economic, social and cultural – was reflected in the political demands of the movements that fought for liberation. It was thus natural that when it came to drafting the Bill of Rights in the Constitution that the Bill of Rights would reflect a holistic and integrated understanding of human rights. This holistic, integrated understanding of human rights was also reflected in the mechanisms envisaged for the enforcement of the rights. Thus, all rights in the Bill of Rights, including socioeconomic rights, were rendered justiciable in terms of section 38 and the remedial provisions in s 172 of the Constitution. Although the South African Constitution is not the only Constitution in the world incorporating justiciable socioeconomic rights, it is a high influential model internationally. It gives practical expression to the reality that without the material foundations for a decent quality of life, the values of human dignity, freedom and equality, 'have a hollow ring' – borrowing the words of the late former President of the Constitutional Court, Chaskalson P, in Soobramoney v Minister of Health, KwaZulu-Natal. The impact of socioeconomic rights jurisprudence While the recognition of socioeconomic rights as justiciable rights in the Bill of Rights was symbolically important, the proof was going to be in the proverbial pudding. Would these rights, as some predicted, simply amount to window-dressing with no practical impact? Or would they impose unmanageable expectations on the courts and drive the Constitutional Court into dictating legislative choices and policy and budgetary priorities to the legislature and executive? None of these predictions have come to pass. The courts, under the leadership of the apex Constitutional Court, have developed an impressive body of jurisprudence. In the time available to me, I am not able to recount all the achievements of this jurisprudence. I will for present purposes highlight a few important developments. There have been a series of cases decided by the Constitutional Court that have had a profound impact on the interrelationship between property rights and the newly recognised right of access to adequate housing in section 26 of the Constitution. Instead of the right to property always trumping weaker rights – as was the position under the pre-constitutional common law – the Constitutional Court has held that there should be an equitable balance between the two rights. They have also developed a set of procedural and substantive safeguards which must be observed when people face homelessness as a result of their eviction from housing and land. Landmark cases that have established these principles include: Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom; Jaftha v Schoeman; Van Rooyen v Stoltz; Port-Elizabeth Municipality v Various Occupiers; City of Johannesburg v Blue Moonlight Properties, and Daniels v Scribante. In the celebrated judgment of Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign, the government was ordered to extend anti-retroviral treatment to all women giving birth in the public health sector to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV. The judgment, along with the pioneering social mobilisation of the Treatment Action Campaign, broke a political logjam, resulting in South Africa developing the largest public sector ARV programme in the world for HIV/Aids treatment. The Court has also developed the integral relationship between socioeconomic rights and the right to equality and non-discrimination. Thus, for example, in Khosa & Mahlauli v Minister of Social Development, the Court (per Mokgoro J) upheld the rights of permanent residents to social assistance. In Mahlangu v Minister of Labour, the Court per Victor AJ declared the exclusion of domestic workers from vital society security legislation – the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, 1993, to be unconstitutional. The courts have also developed a rich and substantive jurisprudence on the right to basic education in section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution, building on the foundations of the Constitutional Court's foundational judgment Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School v Essay NO. In the latter judgment, the Court held that the right to basic education is an 'immediately realisable' right, unlike the qualified socioeconomic rights in sections 26 and 27. Significantly, in AB v Pridwin Preparatory School, the Court held the right to not to be deprived of a basic education without a fair procedure was also enforceable against independent schools. These cases are not only jurisprudentially extremely rich and nuanced, but they have also had real world impacts in improving the material conditions for those socioeconomic exclusion and discrimination. The model of review developed by the Constitutional Court I turn now to the second concern that socioeconomic rights would result in courts usurping the governance functions of the legislature and executive, particularly when enforcing the positive obligations imposed by socioeconomic rights. In the context of sections 26 and 27 of the Constitution (the so-called qualified socioeconomic rights), the Court has developed the so-called reasonableness model of review. This model of review enables the Court to navigate separation of powers issues by placing the primary burden of realising socioeconomic rights on the State, but preserving its own role to evaluate the reasonableness of the measures adopted by the State. Thus, in the foundational judgment of Grootboom, the Court stated that, in reviewing the policies and programmes designed by the State to fulfil socioeconomic rights, a court 'will not enquire whether other more desirable or favourable measures could have been adopted, or whether public money could have been better spent'. Instead, the question will be whether the measures that have been adopted are reasonable, recognising that 'a wide range of possible measures could have been adopted by the State to meet its obligations.' Over the course of several judgments, the Court has developed several criteria for evaluating reasonableness. These include: The State must put in place a comprehensive, coordinated programme with an appropriate allocation of resources and responsibilities between the three spheres of government; The programme must include short-term measures to provide relief to those whose needs are urgent and who are living in intolerable conditions; The programme should not contain unreasonable restrictions or exclusions of certain groups; It should be flexible and responsive to scientific evidence and changing circumstances; and It should be transparent and incorporate meaningful engagement with beneficiaries. Through this model of review, the Court has been able to achieve a balance between appropriate respect for the legislative and policy-making roles of the other branches of government, whilst fulfilling its own constitutional mandate to provide appropriate relief when socioeconomic rights are violated. The model has also been influential internationally. For example, it was expressly incorporated in the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, providing for a quasi-judicial procedure to adjudicate the rights in this global UN human rights treaty. However, I would not be an academic if I did not also voice some of the criticisms of the reasonableness model of review. My own scholarship and that of several other academics have pointed out that the reasonableness of State conduct cannot be assessed in a normative vacuum. The reasonableness of the State's measures can only be assessed in the light of a clear account of the purposes and elements encompassing the relevant socioeconomic right. I have argued that this can be done without prescribing particular socioeconomic policies, and within the framework of the Court's existing reasonableness model. There are many international and regional human rights law and comparative constitutional law sources that can provide guidance in developing the normative elements of socioeconomic rights. However, there are also important developments in the Court's own recent socioeconomic rights jurisprudence which point the way for how the normative content of socioeconomic rights can be developed. Thus, for example, in Daniels v Scribante, the Court (per Madlanga J) adopted a purposive approach to the interpretation of the right of an occupier under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1996 ('ESTA') 'to reside' on the property in question. ESTA is key legislation that gives effect to the land and housing rights in sections 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Thus, the Court held that the right of a farm worker, Ms Daniels, to reside on the farm in question meant a right to reside in conditions consonant with human dignity – namely, a habitable dwelling. Based on this interpretation the Court held that Ms Daniels had the right to make modest improvements to her farm dwelling without the owner's consent. Another significant judgment is Charnell Commando v City of Cape Town, handed down in December last year. This judgment built on Justice Majiedt's minority judgment in Thubakgale and Others v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others to recognise that the redress of the legacies of spatial apartheid in urban land and housing was a key normative goal of the housing rights in section 26 of the Constitution. This led the Court, through the majority judgment of Mathopo J and the partially dissenting judgment of Bilchitz AJ, to recognise that the location of housing is a key element in assessing its adequacy. Cumulatively, these judgments have recognised the elements of 'habitability', 'security of tenure' and 'location' as amongst the key elements of the right of access to adequate housing. The judgments are also rich in historical contextualisation of the rights at issue in the cases. The repair and redress of colonial and apartheid land and housing policies were placed at the centre of the normative goals of the rights in question. These cases illustrate how the Court can develop the normative content of the rights and draw on this content to evaluate the reasonableness of the State's conduct. Conclusion In conclusion, I believe that the Court can be justifiably proud of its record in adjudicating socioeconomic rights. This body of jurisprudence has had a significant international influence and has strengthened the trend towards ensuring that all fundamental rights are treated equally with regard to both their status and enforcement. The Court is a major source of inspiration and hope, particularly in the current global context where human rights are facing profound threats. While we should celebrate the Court's achievements, we should also be acutely aware of the threat posed by the deep patterns of poverty, hunger and inequality to South Africa's democracy. These challenges are, of course, primarily for the elected branches of government and indeed society as a whole to overcome. Nevertheless, the Court has a critically important role to fulfil in redressing socioeconomic rights violations – the rights that speak most directly to the scourge of poverty and economic inequality. In fulfilling this role, the Court is not undermining democracy but rather ensuring that the State remains true to the foundational commitments and values on which our constitutional democracy was founded. As I have attempted to show, a holistic and integrated concept of human rights, incorporating socioeconomic rights, is at the heart of these commitments and values. DM
