Latest news with #Protectionof
The Citizen
01-08-2025
- Politics
- 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
Indian Express
07-06-2025
- Indian Express
POCSO court in Gujarat's Mehsana awards life imprisonment to father for raping minor daughter
A Special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) court in Mehsana district on Friday sentenced a 51-year-old man to rigorous imprisonment for life for repeatedly raping and impregnating his 17-year-old daughter by threatening to kill her and the rest of the family. Awarding the punishment to the accused in the case, the court held that the POCSO Act legislature could 'also not have a reason to think that any father can be an accused' under the Act. Stating that the crime is 'unique and serious', the court said, '…this is a very unfortunate moment that this court had to try this case where an accused under POCSO Act is the father of the victim girl… This court has no words to describe its anguish against the heinous act of this accused… During the whole period of trial the body language of the accused was also observed by this court… no sign of sorrow or (repentance) was there… This court is speechless and really shocked to come across such a case.' The prosecution's case was that in April 2024, the brother of the victim approached the Mehsana district police to lodge an FIR as the victim, who had been taken to a hospital after she complained of stomach pain, was found to be pregnant. The complainant informed the police that the victim had confided in him that her father had raped her and threatened to kill her and the rest of the family members if she complained about the incident. Accordingly, the accused was booked under Indian Penal Code sections for rape, criminal intimidation and under relevant sections of the POCSO Act. 'During deposition of the victim … she repeatedly said that she couldn't believe that her own father had raped her… Accused had threatened the victim. This court is really worried for the future of this victim girl.' The court also awarded a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the victim under the Gujarat Victim Compensation Fund.
