The Cabinet has approved two Bills dealing with the structure and functioning of courts for tabling in Parliament. They are the Superior Courts Bill and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Amendment Bill 14.
The announcement suggests that the deadlock between the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the judiciary about planned reforms to the justice system has eased slightly.
It is not yet clear what precisely the provisions of the proposed legislation are, but chief government spokesperson Joel Netshitenzhe said that some of the less controversial proposals originally floated by the justice department were captured in the Bill.
There is ”sufficient consensus” on the question of rationalising courts, and streamlining management to move ahead with the proposed laws, he said.
The relationship between jurisdictions like the Labour Court and the High Court would also be clarified.
There was heated debate earlier this year after plans were announced to: make the minister of justice responsible for the administration and budgets of courts; institute disciplinary tribunals for judges that included lay people and possibly government representatives; make the justice department responsible for appointments at the justice college; and regulate judges’ working conditions. Other provisions, which are more widely agreed upon, include rationalising the structure of the high courts and reorganising structures that replicate apartheid-era boundaries.
Some of the country’s top judicial officers, including then chief justice Arthur Chaskalson, raised concerns that aspects of the proposals breached the separation of powers and threatened to erode judicial independence.
Minister of Justice Brigitte Mabandla has since been working with the judiciary to hammer out a compromise. People close to the discussions have been predicting for some time that this would involve legislating on the less controversial issues first.
Netshitenzhe referred requests for more detail to the justice department, which did not return repeated calls asking for comment.
Sources who are aware of the general outline of discussions between Mabandla and judges said they weren’t sure what version of the legislation had been approved, but that compromise on several issues now seemed possible.