Latest news with #PromotionofEqualityandPreventionofUnfairDiscriminationAct
TimesLIVE
25-05-2025
- TimesLIVE
SAHRC takes legal action against Gqeberha shop owner for displaying anti-LGBTQ+ sign
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has announced it is initiating legal proceedings against a Gqeberha shop owner, Dawood Lagardien, for publicly displaying an anti-LGBTQ+ sign outside his business. The commission alleges the sign constitutes discrimination, hate speech and harassment against the LGBTQ+ community. The sign displayed outside Lagardien's business read: 'LGBTQ not welcome at La Gardi — Save our children.' According to the SAHRC, the signage was intended to exclude members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual+ (LGBTQ+) community from accessing services offered by the business. 'In addition, the respondent established and actively managed a WhatsApp group titled 'Our Rights — anti LGBTQ+', which contains statements and material that appear to incite harm against individuals who identify as LGBTQ+ and related communities. After assessment of the complaint , the commission has concluded that the alleged actions by Mr Dawood Lagardien constitute hate speech and/or harassment as contemplated in terms of sections 10 and 11 of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA or Equality Act),' said the commission. The commission emphasised 'the critical importance' of fostering a society rooted in non-discrimination, while actively promoting and safeguarding the right to equality for all individuals, irrespective of their sexual orientation. 'The commission is empowered in terms of section 13(3)(b) of the South African Human Rights Commission Act (SAHRC Act), to bring proceedings in a competent court or tribunal in its own name or on behalf of a person or a group or class of people,' it said. The case is scheduled to be heard in the Equality Court sitting in the East London high court on Monday.
Daily Maverick
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Employers and schools can no longer claim ignorance of cyberbullying
South Africa has a robust set of laws to tackle cyberbullying in schools and workplaces. However, in classrooms, offices and online chats, the updating and enforcement of these policies remain deficient. In 2021, a video of 15-year-old Limpopo schoolgirl Lufuno Mavhunga's violent assault at the hands of a fellow learner went viral. Following the assault, Mavhunga took her own life. An investigation by the South African Human Rights Commission found that the school had failed in its duty of care, ignoring pleas from her family and failing to act when alerted. 'We have very good laws,' said Dr Sershiv Reddy, senior lecturer in the department of mercantile law at the University of Johannesburg. 'But sometimes we are impeded by enforcement, maybe due to the lack of funding or other resources.' South Africa's legislative toolkit, including the Protection from Harassment Act (2011) and the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (Pepuda, 2000), offers remedies for victims of harassment and discrimination. These protections often vanish in the policy void between written laws and day-to-day practice. No adults in the room 'More than 95% of our children have access to the internet,' Reddy said 'The keyword is access. It doesn't mean that they may have a mobile device at home, but it means they have access via other means. That could be through a school computer, through the library, [or] an internet café.' Seventy percent of children access the internet without their parents knowing, and more than half of South African schoolchildren have been victims of cyberbullying, Reddy said. In 2018, the Ipsos Research Institute ranked South Africa fifth in a global survey of 28 countries measuring cyberbullying rates. And it's not just children. Anli Bezuidenhout, employment law director at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, pointed out that teachers and employees are also victims of online harassment. WhatsApp and HR While bullies have migrated to WhatsApp groups, Instagram direct messages (DMs) and Zoom calls, schools and workplaces seem stuck in a pre-digital era, failing to proactively update policies. 'Where in the past we may have had policies relating to sexual harassment, we now often see those policies haven't been broadened to also deal with issues such as cyberbullying,' Bezuidenhout said. This is despite the Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace, which came into effect four years ago. It states that employers (including schools) should have anti-harassment policies that also cover digital spaces. Bezuidenhout explained that the code introduces the requirement to review other policies, such as a company or school's social media policy. Off the clock, still on the hook Tim Fletcher, director and chair of dispute resolution at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, describes the Protection from Harassment Act as 'a fairly draconian remedy', but one that is easily obtainable. Victims can approach the magistrate's court, whether in their area, the perpetrator's, or where the incident happened, to secure an interim protection order, Fletcher said. This order becomes effective the moment it is served, and if unchallenged, it converts into a final order with an attached warrant of arrest. Pepuda, meanwhile, offers even broader powers through the Equality Court, allowing action on virtually any ground undermining dignity. And critically, cyberbullying outside of working hours is still grounds for disciplinary action. 'It's off-duty misconduct, you're against the school conduct, against the company's conduct, bringing the company into disrepute. I would still be able to discipline such an individual,' Aadil Patel, head of employment law at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, said. How does this affect you? The boundaries between public and private, workplace and home, have blurred. WhatsApp groups, private DMs and social media posts are not outside the law's reach. Cyberbullying at school or at work is not something you have to endure quietly. The legal system offers tools for protection. But those tools only work if victims and communities know they exist, and use them.
The Citizen
23-04-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
The Long Wait for the South African Disability Act
SEDIBENG.- In South African politics, unmet promises of equality linger. Passing legislation is often more than just a logistical exercise; it is a performance choreographed by various actors who shape, stall, or steer laws depending on the political mood. This is evident in the protracted journey of the South African Disability Act. More than 30 years into democracy, persons with disabilities are still waiting for legislation that directly, comprehensively, and unambiguously addresses their rights. Is this delay a reflection of a lack of commitment, or is it symptomatic of broader inefficiencies within the legislative process? The answer lies in Parliament's ability to pass legislation swiftly when it wants to. For instance, the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA) of 2000 was passed quickly, demonstrating that urgency and political will can overcome procedural hurdles. Several key actors are responsible for developing a robust and effective South African Disability Act, including the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Social Development, Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs), the South African Local Government Association (SALGA), the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, and the Presidency. Looking back at the journey from the first administration to the present, disability rights have been addressed through specific provisions within broader legislation and the application of constitutional principles. However, the fragmented approach has led to gaps in protection and a lack of a cohesive framework addressing the multifaceted needs of persons with disabilities. Laws like the Employment Equity Act and PEPUDA include provisions related to disability, but their integration and enforcement have been inconsistent, with inadequate implementation and enforcement. Despite the absence of a specific Act, the inclusion of disability as a prohibited ground of discrimination in the Constitution and PEPUDA has provided a legal basis for challenging discriminatory practices. Sector-specific initiatives and policies have contributed to advancements in areas like accessible infrastructure and inclusive education. However, the lack of a dedicated, overarching Disability Act has relegated disability issues to the periphery, lacking focused attention and resource allocation. In conclusion, the delay in passing the South African Disability Act suggests a deficit in sustained and prioritized political will. Parliament has demonstrated its capacity for swift action when the imperative is clear. The key actors must translate constitutional ideals into tangible legal protections. Ultimately, the true measure of this legislation will be its effective implementation and enforcement, ensuring that the promise of an inclusive and equitable South Africa becomes a lived reality for all its citizens. Lucky Tumahole is a Disability Advocate and this is his opinion. At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
