lerato mutsila | May 6, 2025
The DA's litigation against Labor Minister Nomahosazana and the Employment Equity Amendment Act is currently underway in the Gauten division of the High Court, with the DA opening the door for the entire bill to be declared invalid.
“Leave enough on your own.” This was a Democrat Alliance (DA) discussion in the Gauteng Division of the High Court on Tuesday, May 6, 2025. This is because the party challenged the constitutionality of the new draft employment capital targets proposed in the recent Official Gazette Employment Equity Amendment Act.
The court was packed with public members, including notable individuals such as DA MP Willie Aucamp and Secretary General Cosatu Solly Phetoe.
Ismail Jamie, the DA's legal representative, told the court that previous iterations of the Employment Equity Act were a flexible, prohibited assignment, which gave the authority to set their own targets based on a particular situation, and balanced the rights of unspecified groups.
Jamie argued that the amended law violated Section 9 of the Constitution because it “replaces subtle and flexible systems with dull and strict systems.”
In April, the Ministry of Employment and Labor left the amendment law to the Official Gazette. It introduced five-year numerical targets for the top four occupational levels (junior, middle, senior and top management) across 18 sectors, ranging from finance to manufacturing.
“Bill of rights”
The main argument for the parties was that Section 15A of the Amendment Act violated the rights of color, Indians and white people, while another important argument was that it was incorrectly tagged on the bill and thus invalidated it.
Jamie argued that the amendment bill was passed under Section 75 of the Constitution (exclusion) rather than Section 76 (controlling law at the national level). Section 76 stipulated how bills affecting states must be passed, and the focus was to ensure that state interests were taken into consideration.
If the party's representative finds that Section 15A of the Amendment Act is in fact invalid because it was incorrectly tagged, the natural consequence of the finding is that the entire Amendment Act is considered invalid to the technology.
Section 15a violates Section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race.
The Minister's discretion under Section 15A does not have a clear legal standard that violates the Dawood principles of administrative law.
The implementation of demographic targets disproportionately biases certain states, particularly the colours of the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal and Indian communities.
Government settlements in SME exemptions and solidarity cases suggest an awareness of the potential economic harms of allocation.
The drama unfolds
The lawsuit was relatively mild, but they were suddenly interrupted by two unidentified individuals.
On a dramatic turn, the men told the judge that if the judge refused to hear them because Congress ignored their interests in drafting a law that worked against their interests, they would consider the case to be cheating if they refused to hear them.
The judge refused to listen to them and immediately dismissed the pair.
The incident is ongoing with representatives from the Ministry of Employment and Labor, which presents the state's debate.
“Disclaimer – the views and opinions expressed in this article are the views of the author and are not necessarily those of the Bee Room.”
