A landmark case that could redefine the legal powers of Chapter 9 institutions such as the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) is expected to be heard before the Constitutional Court on Tuesday.
The matter stems from a complaint by Tubatsi Mosotho and other occupiers of the De Doorn Hock Farm in Mpumalanga, who accused farm owner Francois Gerhardus Boshoff of restricting their borehole water supply.
The SAHRC’s investigation found that Boshoff and Agro Data CC violated the occupiers’ right to access water, as protected by section 6(2)(e) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act and section 27 of the constitution.
The commission ordered the farm to restore water within seven days and to engage with occupants on fair water management. However, that was never done.
When the directives were ignored, the SAHRC approached the courts for relief.
The high court and the Supreme Court of Appeal both ruled that the commission’s directives are not legally binding without a court order.
On Tuesday, the SAHRC will be asking the Constitutional Court to clarify what it means for the commission to “take steps to secure appropriate redress, the legal effect of its findings and recommendations, and how its powers should be interpreted alongside other Chapter 9 institutions.
The outcome is expected to have major implications on whether SAHRC directives can compel action from government, municipalities, or private actors in future human rights disputes.
Sowetan
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.