Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

NHI Act – Let the litigation begin

04 June 2024 | Story Dr Larisse Prinsen | Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Larisse Prinsen, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State

On 15 May 2024, the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill was signed into law by President Ramaphosa during a public ceremony. This did not come as a surprise as Minister in the Presidency, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, had already stated in January that enactment would take place before the 2024 elections. Universal access to health care is an ANC promise, after all, which has led to some calling this public display – as well as the remarks made before the signing – electioneering, considering the closeness of the election to be held at the end of the month.

Now that the Bill has become an Act, however, its actual real-life implementation may be stalled for some time. As the President himself stated during the signing ceremony, the Act is to be implemented in stages. This could potentially take many years if the example of the previous, pivotal piece of health-related legislation, the National Health Act – which took more than a decade to become fully operational – is anything to go by. Each stage of implementation will also bring the potential for a slew of unique legal challenges for the Act and its implementation.

Legislation that could combat the implementation of the NHI Act

There is also the issue of the missing money bill. An Act such as the NHI Act, which has massive financial and economic ramifications, should be accompanied by a money bill drafted by the National Treasury, setting out the financial aspects of the primary Act. So far, no money bill has been drafted, which pauses the implementation of the NHI Act. Should the implementation of the NHI proceed without clarification of the rand-and-cent aspects, legal challenges may be brought.

Further pieces of legislation that could possibly be used to combat the implementation of the NHI Act include the Consumer Protection Act, which aims to establish and protect consumer rights, such as the right to quality goods and services and to select the supplier of your choice; the Competition Act, which fights against restrictive practices and the abuse of a dominant position; or the Protection of Personal Information Act, which may have implications for the large gathering of personal information that will be necessary for the NHI system to be workable. Another notable piece of legislation to consider is the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act.

Various constitutional challenges

Various constitutional challenges are also rumoured to be in the pipeline, with Solidarity, the Democratic Alliance, the Health Funders Association, the South African Medical Association, the Board of Healthcare Funders, the South African Health Professionals Collaboration, as well as Business Unity South Africa all having previously suggested that they may consider, or outright declaring that they will take legal action against the Act as soon as Ramaphosa’s ‘special pen’ touches paper.

The NHI Act may be constitutionally challenged on various grounds. To start with, there are concerns regarding the rule of law’s requirement that the law be clear, unambiguous, and not vague. The lack of clarity on the benefits and cover provided by the NHI scheme has raised many issues. Not only is the ‘what will be covered?’ but also the ‘who will be covered?’ unclear. This not only constitutes legislative vagueness, but this uncertainty also makes it almost impossible to apply our system of checks and balances whereby a determination may be made whether the State is truly adhering to its mandate in Section 27 of the Constitution to take progressive steps to realise the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Litigation may also be instituted based on arguments that Section 33 of the NHI Act, which may lead to the demise of medical aid schemes, is unconstitutional and that it limits the constitutional provision of access to health-care services. In terms of the limitation clause of the Constitution, a limitation is only justified when, among other requirements, there are no less restrictive measures by which the purpose of the limitation may be achieved. Challenges could also be brought against the NHI Act based on nonadherence to requirements of procedural fairness and the principles of participatory democracy, as the consultation processes preceding the enactment have largely been labelled as mere lip service to consultation requirements without having seriously considered the various concerns, objections, submissions, and comments, and even blatantly dismissing them. Other possible causes of action are related to the infringement of the right to autonomy, privacy, association, freedom of expression, as well as freedom of trade, occupation, and profession.

Law and health care intersect

As the ink dries on the NHI Act, the stage is set for many legal dramas to unfold, indicating that the Act’s destiny will be decided by a gavel rather than a pen. While the ceremonial signing marked a historical milestone in the attempt to promote equality in South Africa, the road to implementation is fraught with challenges. With no accompanying money bill in sight and a landscape ripe for constitutional scrutiny, the Act's journey forward is likely to be tumultuous. As stakeholders gear up to challenge its provisions on various fronts – from procedural fairness to constitutional rights – the NHI Act is poised to become a battleground where the nuances of law and health care intersect. As the curtains rise on this legal saga, the true test of the Act's viability and constitutionality awaits.

More institutional experts can be found at: https://www.ufs.ac.za/media/leading-researchers

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered

2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply. What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations. You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?)

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept