Latest news with #NHI)Bill
The Star
3 days ago
- Health
- The Star
Ramaphosa asks Constitutional Court to overturn NHI judgment
President Cyril Ramaphosa has appealed to the Constitutional Court in a bid to overturn a recent Gauteng High Court ruling that challenged the legality of his decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law. The controversial bill, signed by Ramaphosa in May 2024, is a cornerstone of the government's proposed overhaul of South Africa's healthcare system, aiming to establish universal health coverage for all citizens. However, the High Court in Pretoria ruled shortly afterwards that Ramaphosa's assent to the bill could be subject to judicial review — a finding that raised constitutional and procedural concerns. The court also ordered the president to provide a full record of all documentation and deliberations that informed his decision to approve the legislation. This move sparked criticism from legal and political commentators who viewed it as a significant intrusion into executive authority. Now, Ramaphosa is asking the Constitutional Court — South Africa's highest legal authority on constitutional matters — to review and set aside the High Court's judgment. In his application, the president contends that the lower court may have overstepped its bounds, arguing that it infringed on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. According to court papers filed by Ramaphosa, the High Court ruling 'undermines the functioning of the executive' and grants the judiciary undue influence over matters that, by design, fall within the president's discretion. He maintains that while all actions of public office bear scrutiny, the power to sign legislation into law lies squarely with the executive and must be exercised without judicial interference unless a direct constitutional violation is evident. The legal dispute unfolds amid intense national debate over the NHI, which has drawn sharp reactions from across the political spectrum. Supporters argue that the legislation is necessary to address systemic inequality in access to healthcare, while critics — including major stakeholders in the private healthcare industry — warn that the bill is vague, fiscally unsustainable, and potentially unconstitutional. The High Court's ruling added a new layer of complexity to the NHI saga, as it suggested the president's role in enacting legislation is not immune from legal challenge if the process appears flawed. Some constitutional scholars noted that the court's directive to produce the 'record of decision' implies that judicial oversight could extend into executive reasoning, a move with far-reaching implications. Legal experts say the outcome of Ramaphosa's appeal could set an important precedent for the limits of presidential authority and the role of the judiciary in legislative processes. If the Constitutional Court agrees to hear the matter, its judgment will have significant consequences not only for the future of the NHI but also for the balance of power between branches of government.
Eyewitness News
4 days ago
- Politics
- Eyewitness News
Access to details on decision to sign NHI Bill into law is a privilege, argues Ramaphosa
JOHANNESBURG - President Cyril Ramaphosa has argued that access to a record detailing what informed his decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law is a matter of privilege. The president has petitioned the Constitutional Court in an application for leave to appeal a High Court judgment over the NHI Act. In May, the court found that his decision to sign the bill into law was reviewable, ordering him to submit to the court the record of what led to his decision. However, the president argues that furnishing the court with the record is not a legal requirement. In papers before the Constitutional Court, Ramaphosa submits says various factors are considered before assenting to and signing a bill into law. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa takes his appeal against high court ruling on NHI to ConCourt Among them are the inputs by legal advisors, which the president says he has never been required to produce before and may be of a privileged nature. He adds that the record is at the heart of his performance in executing his obligations as enshrined in the constitution, and the order that he furnish the court with the record engages issues regarding the office of the presidency. This, Ramaphosa says, breaches the separation of powers doctrine, unnecessarily allowing courts to 'check the homework' of the head of State. The president further submits that the non-disclosure of the record in no way impedes parties from launching a constitutionality challenge, as this is a mechanism provided for by the Constitution.
IOL News
4 days ago
- Health
- IOL News
Ramaphosa asks Constitutional Court to overturn NHI judgment
President Cyril Ramaphosa has appealed to the Constitutional Court in a bid to overturn a recent Gauteng High Court ruling that challenged the legality of his decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law. President Cyril Ramaphosa has appealed to the Constitutional Court in a bid to overturn a recent Gauteng High Court ruling that challenged the legality of his decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law. The controversial bill, signed by Ramaphosa in May 2024, is a cornerstone of the government's proposed overhaul of South Africa's healthcare system, aiming to establish universal health coverage for all citizens. However, the High Court in Pretoria ruled shortly afterwards that Ramaphosa's assent to the bill could be subject to judicial review — a finding that raised constitutional and procedural concerns. The court also ordered the president to provide a full record of all documentation and deliberations that informed his decision to approve the legislation. This move sparked criticism from legal and political commentators who viewed it as a significant intrusion into executive authority. Now, Ramaphosa is asking the Constitutional Court — South Africa's highest legal authority on constitutional matters — to review and set aside the High Court's judgment. In his application, the president contends that the lower court may have overstepped its bounds, arguing that it infringed on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. According to court papers filed by Ramaphosa, the High Court ruling 'undermines the functioning of the executive' and grants the judiciary undue influence over matters that, by design, fall within the president's discretion.
The South African
06-05-2025
- Health
- The South African
Cyril Ramaphosa ordered to give reasons for signing NHI Bill into law
The High Court has ruled that President Cyril Ramaphosa's decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law is open to judicial review – and that he must submit a full record of the reasoning behind his decision within 10 days . The ruling comes in response to legal action brought by the Board of Health Funders (BHF) and the South African Private Practitioners Forum (SAPPF), who argued that Ramaphosa acted irrationally by assenting to the bill in May 2024 despite widespread constitutional and legal concerns raised during the legislative process. At the heart of the matter is whether the Ramaphosa fulfilled his constitutional obligation under Section 79(1) of the Constitution, which allows – and arguably requires – the president to refer a bill back to parliament if there are reservations about its constitutionality. The BHF contends that, by signing the bill into law without doing so, Ramaphosa neglected that duty and set in motion what they describe as 'vague, unaffordable, and unworkable' legislation. Ramaphosa's legal team had pushed back, arguing that his decision was part of his constitutional discretion and not subject to judicial oversight. However, the court rejected that claim. 'The president's decision to assent to and sign the NHI Bill is reviewable because all executive decisions are reviewable under the principle of legality or under Rule 53,' the court found. The court held that assenting to legislation is not an isolated presidential act, but a step in the broader legislative process – and, therefore, subject to scrutiny. In its ruling, the High Court has ordered Ramaphosa to provide the complete record of the decision-making process – including documents and correspondence – in line with Rule 53 of the Uniform Rules of Court. The ruling is a significant development in the ongoing battle over the NHI, a health reform initiative aimed at establishing universal health coverage. While its supporters say it will improve healthcare access for all South Africans, critics argue it lacks financial feasibility, undermines private healthcare, and was rushed through without sufficient consultation. The BHF hailed the ruling as a constitutional victory. 'No office-bearer, including the president, is above judicial scrutiny,' the organisation said in a statement. It added that the court's decision reaffirms that all public power is accountable to the rule of law. The case now moves into its next phase, where the contents of Cyril Ramaphosa's record may shed light on whether the signing of the NHI Bill was made with adequate consideration of public, legal, and policy concerns. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
TimesLIVE
02-05-2025
- Health
- TimesLIVE
Fosa urges Ramaphosa to fast-track NHI implementation
The Forum for South Africa (Fosa) has called on President Cyril Ramaphosa to urgently implement the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill. The organisation made this call after a Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department (JMPD) officer was reportedly denied emergency treatment due to unpaid hospital bills by the City of Johannesburg. TimesLIVE reported the officer was shot while on duty but was turned away at Netcare Milpark Hospital because the city owes the hospital R35m. Tebogo Mashilompane, national leader of Fosa, urged the president to fast-track the implementation of NHI so access to health facilities was not restricted. Fosa said it was clear the time for NHI was now. Mashilompane said the working class and the poor could not continue to suffer under a healthcare system that prioritised money over human life. 'Access to health facilities is a fundamental human right, so NHI will make that possible.'
