Defending Democracy: The Role of Chapter 9 Institutions Amidst Attacks
Image: Itumeleng English / Indepedent Newspapers
Last week (July 17, 2025) we participated in a demonstration when a group failed with hate, marched to the offices of the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (Seri). While Seri were targeted by this group which one journalist called "vigilante anti-immigration group Operation Dudula", they were attacking something much wider: our democracy.
On their posters, they informed the public that their march was against "Unpatriotic NGOs and Chapter 9 Institutions Must Fall!!!"
The poster for the demonstration.
Image: Supplied
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad loading
Under attack were groups like the Helen Suzman Foundation, the Human Rights Commission and Seri.
Their poster accused these NGOs for protecting criminals – illegal immigrants. When we met them outside the Seri offices, police were on hand to ensure peace under trying circumstances as a few in the group dressed in expensive military fatigues, and carried intimidatory rocks as they hurled insults at us.
The march against these groups was defended by others in the civil society movement, groups such as Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia, Abahlali baseMjondolo, the Inner City Federation, and the South African Informal Traders Forum – the glaring absence from other political and civic formations in particular unions in defending if not the NGOs but a Chapter 9 body was obvious and glaring.
Austerity: friendly fire?
The Human Rights Commission were singled out because they reaffirmed the principles and values of the Constitution and the rulings of the Constitutional Court on health care for all. But this must not hide the fact that the Commission has been injured by friendly fire – our government.
The austerity measures of the government against the people and these bodies that are supposed to serve the public is the real enemy. It would be good, even with the fiscal repression, to have seen democrats from all hues and shades that profess to love the constitution be present and make a stand for this Constitution and its values.
For the uninformed, bodies like the (a) The Public Protector; (b) The South African Human Rights Commission; (c) The Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities; (d) The Commission for Gender Equality; (e) The Auditor-General; and (f) The Electoral Commission, all are known as Chapter 9 institutions.
They take their name from the chapter of the Constitution with the heading: Chapter 9: State Institutions Supporting Constitutional Democracy.
Political economist Ebrahim-Khalil Hassen argues that Chapter 9 institutions, including the Human Rights Commission, face significant challenges as budgets are unlikely to grow significantly. He shows that the SAHRC programme on 'monitoring observance of human rights' budget will decline by 10% between 2024/25 and projected budget in 2027/28.
While the government websites extol the virtues of our participatory democracy and the role of the Chapter 9s as being a check on power, they do not fund these sentiments. The writer beautifully quotes former Chief Justice Pius Langa when he states that their role is 'to secure the freedom of every citizen by seeking to avoid an excessive concentration of power, which can lead to abuse, in one person or body'.
Is the underfunding just about our poverty or is it an ideology of austerity that inevitably undermines us all, starting with civic organisations, including those constitutional bodies that are mandated to keep a check on power? While you ponder on this, think what could be achieved if the funds would have been used to revitalise bodies like the SAHRC and others that are supposed to do their work without fear or favour?
It is not all doom and gloom, and I feel I must end with these two hopeful takeaways from the recent events.
Firstly, I will be failing to mention that the staff and leaders at Chapter 9s are doing a sterling job and are committed to do so against all odds. They could do better with greater citizens' pressure, critical participation and support so that they can deliver on their mandate without fear or favour. In addition to the SAHRC, we have the Auditor General of South Africa (AGSA), a body that has not failed to tell the government about how it is using public funds, and they are not afraid to call out the government in cases of corruption, or where funds were not used properly.
Citizens and civil society groups could do better by reading their audit reports and helping them (and us) to widen the base and culture of transparency and accountability that the AGSA have been trying to grow. Similarly with the Electoral Commission (IEC) which, despite austerity, has maintained its mission of being an ' independent constitutional body which manages free and fair elections of legislative bodies and institutions through the participation of citizens, political parties and civil society in deepening electoral democracy'.
In conclusion, I return to the protests and confirm that it was democracy in action as a civic society consisting largely of the working class and poor were engaged in debate on the streets. Amidst song and toyi-toyi at the defence of the Seri offices, one of the leaders of the shack-dwellers movement Abahlali baseMjondolo and coordinator of the peaceful gathering, Sbu Zikode, spoke directly to the leaders and the few members that attended from Operation Dudula.
He said that they were targeting their ire and fire and the wrong people and called on them to join the struggle for real socio-economic and political justice that is inclusive and not hateful.
That invitation I believe still stands.
* Hassen Lorgat is a social justice activist who has worked in trade union and anti-apartheid sports movements.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
43 minutes ago
- The Citizen
Metro's refusal to disclose power infrastructure data challenged
The metro is standing firm against AfriForum's application for critical information relating to the ongoing power crisis in Pretoria, igniting tensions between the civil rights organisation and municipal authorities. The organisation lodged an internal appeal on July 25, after the metro rejected its initial request, made under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), asserting that the metro's refusal was unlawful and lacked sufficient reasoning as prescribed by the law. AfriForum's application, originally submitted on May 21, requested detailed records about the metro's power infrastructure, including substation lists, maintenance schedules, contractor details, and maintenance reports. The group aims to shed light on the management and upkeep of these vital assets, which have been linked to frequent, prolonged power outages affecting large parts of Pretoria. 'This PAIA application was submitted to protect the public's interests and livelihoods. 'The right to access information is non-negotiable, especially when residents suffer because of the metro's poor maintenance and lack of transparency,' said Arno Roodt, AfriForum's district coordinator for Greater Pretoria South. Despite widespread power failures, often blamed on cable theft, poor planning, and inadequate maintenance, the metro responded vaguely to AfriForum's request, said Roodt. The municipality stated it 'reserves the right not to consent to the request at this time,' without providing any clear, legally grounded reasons for its refusal. 'This vague explanation flies in the face of both the relevant legislation and Section 32 of the Constitution. It reeks of a municipality trying to hide something. 'The public has a right to know why infrastructure is burning, why substations are failing, and who is responsible for these weekly power outages,' Roodt said. AfriForum's appeal aims to show that the metro's response falls short of the standards set by PAIA, which requires public bodies to provide substantive reasons when refusing access to information. According to Roodt, the metro did not meet these procedural or substantive requirements, effectively issuing a non-decision cloaked in ambiguous language. The appeal insists that even if some information could be exempt under PAIA's exceptions, the public interest in transparency about the electricity crisis outweighs those exceptions. 'The breakdowns and irregularities at substations will only end when light is shed on them,' Roodt stressed. Power outages in Pretoria have caused widespread disruption, affecting residents' safety, businesses, and daily life. The failures are not limited to occasional load shedding, but include severe infrastructure breakdowns, theft, and sabotage. AfriForum contends these problems stem largely from the metro's failure to maintain infrastructure properly, lack of transparency, and absence of security measures like surveillance cameras at substations. 'This refusal to disclose information under PAIA shields maladministration from exposure and accountability,' said Roodt. If the metro fails to release the requested information by August 22, the deadline for the internal appeal, the organisation plans to escalate the matter by lodging a formal complaint with the Information Regulator, an independent body tasked with enforcing PAIA compliance. Roodt confirmed that, should that move prove ineffective, legal action will be considered to compel the release of information. The metro has yet to respond publicly to the internal appeal or the deadline of August 22. This has left residents and civil society groups anxiously waiting to see if the municipality will uphold its legal obligations or continue to block access to information vital to resolving the power crisis. 'This is not just about accessing documents,' Roodt emphasised. 'It is about holding the metro accountable and ensuring transparency that protects residents' constitutional right to basic services, safety, and governance.' AfriForum's 'Fight and Build' approach combines legal challenges with grassroots efforts to strengthen community oversight of municipal infrastructure. The organisation advocates for the installation of security systems at vulnerable substations, organised neighbourhood watches, and ongoing public pressure to reform governance. 'Transparency is essential to restoring trust, preventing corruption, and improving the quality of life in our communities,' Roodt said. 'The metro's refusal has serious implications for service delivery, governance, and the safety of Pretoria's residents.' Selby Bokaba, metro spokesperson, said the information about the Maintenance Schedule and Records, Inspections and Compliance Reports and Breakdowns of Failure Incidents may not be released in line with the request tor for security reasons. 'Furthermore, some of the information requested may consist of personal information of information of a third party and written consent to disclose this information should be obtained from the data subject or owner prior to the release of such information,' said Bokaba. Major substation fires in Pretoria since 2021 – Wapadrand Substation: 2021 The Wapadrand substation was destroyed by fire, leaving parts of the city without power for weeks. The incident prompted the metro to allocate R20-million for battery surge protection at substations. – Koedoespoort Substation: June 2023 A transformer explosion at the Koedoespoort substation led to power outages in areas including Koedoespoort, Weavind Park, Lindopark, and others. The explosion followed recent repairs due to cable theft, and technicians worked to assess and restore power. – Pyramid Substation: September 2023 A lightning strike ignited a fire at the temporary Pyramid substation near Rooiwal Power Station. The blaze damaged the transformer and spread into the high-tension yard. The fire was contained, and investigations attributed the cause to the lightning strike. – Mooikloof Substation: April 2024 A fire at the Mooikloof substation triggered a trip at the Nyala in-feed station, affecting areas including Mooikloof, Wapadrand, and surrounding farms. The fire was caused by a fault originating from an external 11kV power line. – Njala Substation: August 2024 A 275kV transformer at the Njala substation in Moreleta Park exploded and caught fire. Emergency services from Erasmuskloof, Silverton, and Mamelodi fire stations responded promptly, extinguishing the fire within two hours. No injuries were reported, and the cause remains under investigation. – Brakfontein Substation: April 2025 A fire at the Brakfontein substation resulted in widespread power outages. Residents reported challenges such as reliance on candles and outdoor cooking. The fire was linked to previous cable theft incidents. – Zwartkop Substation: May 2025 A fire and explosion at the Zwartkop substation caused significant outages affecting Clubview, Valhalla, and Thaba Tshwane. Investigations revealed extensive vandalism and damage to high-tension cables. The substation remained offline while repairs were underway. ALSO READ: Fake ID syndicate busted in north of Pretoria raid, two arrested Do you have more information about the story? Please send us an email to [email protected] or phone us on 083 625 4114. For free breaking and community news, visit Rekord's websites: Rekord East For more news and interesting articles, like Rekord on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or Instagram or TikTok.
Daily Maverick
9 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Can hate speech be defended as freedom of religion? Court to decide in LGBTQ discrimination case
A Gqeberha shop owner who put up a sign banning LGBTQIA+ patrons and ran an anti-LGBTQ WhatsApp group is at the centre of a landmark hate speech case. While he claims religious freedom, the Human Rights Commission argues that his conduct incites violence and violates the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The High Court has called for further submissions. The court battle between the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and Gqeberha businessman Dawood Lagardien, accused of promoting hate speech by refusing to serve members of the LGBTQIA+ community, continues in the city's high court, where the presiding officer has called for supplementary submissions from both sides. While the latest court appearance took place last week, the matter dates back to mid-2023 when photographs started circulating of a chalkboard outside La Gardi Catering Plastics in Parkside. Shop owner Dawood Lagardien wrote: 'LGBTQ not welcome at La Gardi – Save our children'. Shortly thereafter it came to light that Lagardien was also the administrator of a WhatsApp chat group called Our rights – antiLGBTQ+. The SAHRC took the matter to court, claiming that Lagardien was in violation of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (Pepuda) and actively promoting hate speech and discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation. 'The commission submits that the impugned conduct – the establishment of a WhatsApp group and putting up of the sign outside the shop – constitutes hate speech. In this regard it must be recalled that the respondent has admitted to putting up the sign and establishing the WhatsApp group, so it is common cause that impugned conduct is attributable to him,' the SAHRC's heads of argument read. It further argued that Lagardien's sign offered no reasons for banning people from his shop and simply promoted discrimination. The commission also quoted messages shared on Lagardien's WhatsApp group, claiming clear Pepuda violations, hate speech and incitement to violence. One message read: 'LGBTQ is a blatant attack on Islam. Force is the only option… If only I had a powerful group to crush these sodomists […] and crush these evil vermin from.' As part of its claim, the SAHRC calls on Lagardien to issue a public apology to the LGBTQIA+ community and damages in the amount of R500,000 be paid to an NGO yet to be identified. In his responding documents, Lagardien does not deny putting up the sign or starting the chat group, but argues that he did not violate Pepuda, and rather that he was exercising his right to religious freedom as a devout Muslim. 'As part of his beliefs regarding Islam, he believes that same-sex relationships are un-Islamic and amoral. He also holds the belief that, under his faith, he is obliged to take steps to prevent children from being exposed to what his faith and spiritual beliefs dictate is amoral behaviour,' his responding heads of argument read. In addition to opposing the SAHRC application, Lagardien also brought a counter-application, alleging that the commission's investigation was defective and it failed to discharge its duties under the South African Human Rights Commissions Act. He recounted an incident in June 2023 where two homosexual men allegedly entered his store and engaged in 'sexually inappropriate behaviour' by kissing and touching each other's genitals in front of Muslim customers and their young children. When asked to leave the store, the men allegedly told Lagardien they could do as they pleased during Pride Month. He alleged that the following day his daughter was threatened by two men from the LGBTQ+ community inside the store, and further threats of violence followed when Lagardien requested that they leave the store. This incident prompted him to post the disputed sign outside his store. Days later he found the sign had been destroyed. He stated that the WhatsApp group was created to 'alert members of his community to the threats and intimidation from the LGBTQ community'and to communicate Islamic teachings on homosexuality. While he claimed no messages to incite violence were ever sent on the group, he also stated that none of the screenshots of messages contained in the SAHRC's documents were linked to his phone number or WhatsApp account. The group has since been closed, and Lagardien reiterated that the sign outside his shop had been destroyed in response to claims that he refused to remove it. Lagardien argues the SAHRC's claim against him violates his right to freedom of religion, while the SAHRC states that his conduct goes far beyond the Islamic stance against homosexuality. The matter returned to the Gqeberha High Court last Monday, 28 July 2025. The court determined that SAHRC, represented by Advocate Siphelo Mbeki, and Lagardien, represented by Advocate Feroze Boda, must submit supplementary heads of argument in the next few weeks before a final judgment can be made. DM
The Citizen
2 days ago
- The Citizen
ConCourt declares appointment of 5 CGE commissioners invalid due to limited public participation
The CGE acknowledged the ruling in a brief statement on Friday. The Constitutional Court (ConCourt) has ruled that the appointments of five commissioners to the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) are invalid, citing Parliament's failure to ensure adequate public participation in the selection process. The ruling follows a legal challenge brought by the non-profit organisation Corruption Watch. The respondents in the matter included the speaker of the National Assembly, the president, the Information Regulator, and the five CGE commissioners. ALSO READ: Reserve Bank unlawfully interfered in Absa chair appointment, says court Media Monitoring Africa was admitted as amicus curiae (friend of the court). Corruption Watch contested the appointments of CGE commissioners chairperson Nthabiseng Sepanya-Mogale, deputy chairperson Prabashni Subrayan Naidoo, Thando Gumede, Bongani Ngomane, and Leonashia Leigh-Ann Van Der Merwe, all of whom took office in March 2023. These appointments, for terms of up to five years, were made by the president upon recommendation by Parliament. CGE commissioners' appointment process challenged The nomination process was led by Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities. It began in June 2022 and closed nearly a month later. A shortlist of four candidates was compiled in late August, while public comment was invited between 2 and 16 September. Submissions were to be made via an online form linked through Parliament's website. The link led to a spreadsheet listing candidates' names and qualifications, but their full CVs were not published. READ MORE: Initiation schools: Commission wants answers on why recommendations haven't been carried out Despite Corruption Watch requesting an extension of the public comment period to 30 days, the removal of the character limit on submissions, and the release of CVs, the National Assembly proceeded with its recommendations to the president following candidate interviews. The appointments were announced on 25 February 2023, and the commissioners assumed office on 1 March. Corruption Watch then brought its application before the ConCourt under section 167(4)(e) of the Constitution, which grants the court exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether the National Assembly has failed to fulfil a constitutional obligation. The organisation argued that Parliament's process was flawed due to the limited public access to information about candidates, a 2 000-character restriction on submissions, and the short 14-day window for public comment. (4/4) CCT 333/23 Corruption Watch (RF) NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others August 1, 2025 The speaker defended the process, stating it was reasonable and consistent with past procedures. It was argued that the 14-day period was sufficient, that public comments were properly considered, and that CVs could not be published without candidates' consent in accordance with the Protection of Personal Information Act (Popia). However, the Information Regulator clarified in an affidavit that such consent is not required when the information is needed for the performance of public duties. ConCourt judgment In a unanimous ruling delivered on Friday, the ConCourt sided with Corruption Watch and found that the public participation process was insufficient. 'In the circumstances, the appointment process conducted by the National Assembly therefore did not comply with the obligations imposed by section 59(1)(a) of the Constitution and is therefore invalid,' the summary of the 1 August judgement reads. The declaration of invalidity has been suspended for 12 months from the date of the order, giving Parliament time to conduct a constitutionally compliant appointment process and allowing the president to make appointments. Reactions The CGE acknowledged the ruling in a brief statement on Friday. 'The commission remains committed to its legislative mandate and will continue to discharge its responsibilities while Parliament undertakes its processes. 'The commission will not make further public pronouncements or respond to media enquiries on this matter,' the statement reads. In addition, Corruption Watch welcomed the outcome. 'South African citizens have a right to participate fully in these processes, particularly where such institutions are at the forefront of ensuring justice and enforcement of human rights in the country. 'The opportunity for people to have their say in the appointment of representatives to Chapter 9 institutions like the CGE, is an important example of that process,' the organisation said in a statement. The CGE operates under section 187 of the Constitution, with a mandate to promote and protect gender equality. In March last year, six other commissioners – Seeham Samaai, Mulalo Grace Nemathaheni, Mfundo Nomvungu, Yanga Malotana, Kamohelo Rodney Teele, and Marion Lynn Stevens – were recommended by Parliament and subsequently approved by the president. NOW READ: MK party and Zuma suffer blow as ConCourt rules in Ramaphosa's favour
