A parliamentary committee has proposed sweeping and controversial changes to the structure and functioning of institutions such as the Human Rights Commission (HRC), the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) and other constitutional bodies.
In a report tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, the Ad Hoc Committee on the Review of Chapter Nine and Associated Institutions calls for the HRC to become an ”umbrella” human rights organisation incorporating three other existing commissions.
This would see the HRC absorbing the National Youth Commission, the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (together with the Pan-South African Language Board — PanSALB) and the Commission for Gender Equality.
In a 267-page report to the National Assembly, the committee — chaired by veteran African National Congress MP Kader Asmal — proposes the umbrella body be called the South African Commission on Human Rights and Equality.
This proposal, if adopted by the Assembly, will require changes to South Africa’s Constitution.
On Icasa, the report says perceptions the authority lacks independence are ”potentially undermining of its credibility and, therefore, its legitimacy”.
The committee also says it considers the appointment of Icasa councillors by the communications minister to be ”inappropriate”.
Further, it calls for Icasa’s performance-management system to be revised ”to remove the role of the minister in this regard”.
The report is critical of the National Youth Commission, saying it ”does not serve its purpose”.
Further, parliamentary mechanisms for oversight of the commission are inadequate.
”The commission is not particularly effective in carrying out its mandate,” it finds.
The report also condemns the Commission for Gender Equality, saying it ”displays a poor understanding of its legal and constitutional mandate”.
Its relationship with civil society is unsatisfactory, and requires urgent attention.
On PanSALB, the committee says it is ”of the firm view that there is an unnecessary, ineffective and costly duplication of work” between it and the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities, as well as between the board and the Arts and Culture Department.
It recommends the board’s lexicography unit be transferred to the department, ”and that the board be incorporated into the commission”.
A decline in the number of complaints received by the board over the past two years are an indication of a decline in its public profile.
On a single human rights organisation, the report says this will bring many important benefits.
”A single organisation will be a strong and authoritative champion for equality and human rights. The new body will incorporate the expertise on specific areas of human rights, now spread across bodies, and will thus be better able to respond to … human rights challenges in South Africa.”
The committee also says it is concerned about the ”role given to ministers” in the appointment processes involving PanSALB, the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities and Icasa.
”The role of the relevant ministers could be seen as infringing on the independence of these institutions and, as such, is in the view of the committee inappropriate.
”Accordingly, the committee recommends that ministers should play no role in the appointment procedures for independent institutions.”
Addressing a media briefing on the release of the report, Asmal described it as ”honest, fair-minded and sincere”, and said committee members had not shirked from asking thorny questions.
He acknowledged the report might draw a negative reaction from some quarters.
”Not everyone will, of course, agree with all the findings and the recommendations contained in the report, and some might even be upset by aspects of [it] they might view as unfair or unwise.”
He said the most far-reaching and ”dramatic” findings centred around the committee’s realisation that ”the proliferation of bodies promoting and protecting human rights diminishes, rather than enhances, the effectiveness of these bodies”.
It has therefore come to the ”difficult but ultimately correct conclusion” that in the long term a single body would better protect and promote human rights, he said. — Sapa