There have been mixed views from political parties and unions regarding the signing of the Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill into law.
Some want President Cyril Ramaphosa to sign it immediately while others say it must go back to National Assembly.
The bill was passed by Parliament in May this year, it aims to amend the Schools Act and the Employment of Educators Act.
The South African Democratic Teachers’ Union (Sadtu) again called on Ramaphosa to sign the bill, saying it has been there for years, while the DA want him to apply his mind thoroughly and not be put under pressure.
Newly appointed Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube wants Ramaphosa to send the bill back to Parliament after the DA expressed concern about the role of School Governing Bodies (SGBs).
In October last year Saftu, during its National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting, said it welcomed the adoption of the Bela Bill by the Basic Education Portfolio Committee.
“The NEC further expressed disgust at the DA’s ridiculous challenge to the Bela Bill. Discrimination on the basis of race and language should not be tolerated by anyone in our country given our history but the DA and ACDP are hellbent on taking us backwards. Sadtu supported the powers provided to the head of the department to be the person with final authority to admit the child because SGBs refuse to deracialise and integrate our children,” said Sadtu national spokesperson Nomusa Cembi.
There are reports that the union threatened to strike if Ramaphosa did not sign the bill into law.
Cembi told The Star that they are still consulting their stakeholders and cannot release a date if a strike is to take place.
Sadtu secretariat officer Xolani Fakude, in an interview with Newzroom Afrika, said that for the bill to get to where it is now, it had to take 10 years or so. He added that it has gone through the National Assembly and two public consultations.
ACDP deputy president Wayne Thring, also in the interview, said the party is opposing the bill in its current form.
“The ACDP has called for numerous reforms to the bill. Concerns that we have raised can be summarised into two or three key points. First is such as Section 41 of the Bill gives the minister almost unfiltered powers in terms of drafting policy which would be made almost legal without necessary going through the parliamentary process where members of parliament where they would be able to scrutinise before implemented,” said Thring.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, on Monday, said: “Now, for the president to exercise any of the above constitutional responsibilities, he must have applied his mind thoroughly. The processing of a bill means evaluating every stage of the process it went through as per the statutory provisions. The submissions made during the public consultation process also need to be studied and evaluated properly before the president can reach a decision to exercise any of the responsibilities he is accorded by the Constitution.
“Ensuring that the bill passes constitutional muster is a key part of the exercise. It is for this reason that we never give timelines as to when a bill will be signed because it’s not a matter of a date and time to just place a signature. Such a process can take months if it is conducted properly with the level of thoroughness it requires,” said Magwenya.
He further said: “As you would know, a number of bills landed on the president's desk before the end of the 6th term of Parliament. Equally, a number of those bills have been efficiently processed and signed into law while others, including the Bela Bill, are still being processed.”
From the onset, DA did not support this bill. National spokesperson Willie Aucamp told ‘The Star’ that their position remains exactly the same.
“We have during the deliberations of this bill raised large number of issues that we do not agree with. We’ve also raised a large number of problems we believe that this bill will not pass the test of Constitutionality. This bill is in front of the president for his signature and in his decision making process, he will have to take those problems into account before signing the Bill into law,” said Aucamp.
He said he is sure that the president doesn’t want to sign something into law just for it to later on be decided “unconstitutional”.
Aucamp said the president must be afforded the time to really make an informed decision on this before he can decide what his next actions are.
The Star