Thank you, programme director.
Over the last two decades the world has witnessed the unprecedented acceleration of globalisation and developments in technology which hold the potential for an overall improved quality of human existence across the globe. While globalisation has increased trade and indeed made the world a more prosperous place, all this is concentrated in a few hands - the incomes of the top 1% have increased 60% in the last twenty years while that of the top 0.01% has been even greater.
This accumulation however takes place in the face of rising inequality between and within countries. The resultant discontent mostly stems from the frustration of inequity and of not being included at various levels of governance. This is evident world-wide from the Occupy movement in North America and Europe, to the Arab Spring, to protests in London, Turkey, Greece, Brazil and elsewhere.
It clearly demonstrates that unless people participate meaningfully in the events and processes that shape their lives, human development, democracy and governance is not sustainable. People must be able to influence policymaking and its results - and young people in particular should be able to look forward to greater economic opportunities, political participation and accountability of state institutions.
It is in the above context that I wish to congratulate Professor Daniel Plaaitjies and Jacana Media on the launch of ‘Protecting the Inheritance: Governance and Public Accountability in Democratic South Africa. In a nutshell, this book provides both a practical as well as a theoretical analysis of governance and accountability and its challenges in post-apartheid South Africa. Not only does the book contain articles from scholars in the field of political science, governance and law, but it also includes contributions from those of us who work at the so called coal face of our institutions of governance. It also includes office bearers from Parliament, the Executive, as well as a State Institution Supporting Constitutional Democracy.
As we enter into our second decade of democracy and prepare for our fourth democratic elections, the timing of this publication is very apt. While we are certainly proud of our remarkable achievements and milestones, a functioning democracy, institutions of governance based on a culture of human rights at this juncture, it is vital to take a critical look at current governance and accountability issues to ensure that we remain relevant to the needs of our people. This publication provides another welcome platform to critically debate matters of such fundamental importance.
Prior to our first elections, Madiba said that if there is a single lesson to be drawn from Africa’s post-colonial history, it is that of accountable government is a good government. While our Constitution was a product of compromise in respect of the transitional arrangements such as the government of national unity and so forth, the founding values of our Constitution, as drawn up by a representative Constituent Assembly, is based on:
- Human dignity, the achievement of equality, and the advancement of human rights and freedoms,
- Non-racialism and non-sexism;
- The supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law, as well as
- Democratic government to ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness.
In my view, democratic governance, accountability, responsiveness and openness of government is the key that underpins the aim of our Constitution, the achievement of substantive equality and a better life for all. It is in this sense that we understand Madiba’s words on good governance, together with his warning that democracy itself, cannot survive unless the material needs of the people are addressed as part of the process of change and as a matter of urgency. It should never be that the anger of the poor should be the finger of accusation pointed at all of us because we failed to respond to the cries of the people for food, for shelter, for the dignity of the individual.
Parliament in this sense plays the most vital role in our democracy as it is primarily an institution that represents the people and their aspirations and ensures that this translates into laws and policies. Putting people at the centre of development is not merely a slogan, but is a principle that emanates from the Freedom Charter’s key theme that "The people shall govern”. This theme is encapsulated in section 42 of the Constitution that enjoins the National Assembly to ensure government by the people under the Constitution by providing a national forum for public consideration of issues, by passing legislation, scrutinising and overseeing executive action.
Parliament’s mandate from the Constitution requires that we provide meaningful opportunities for our people’s involvement in our legislative and other processes. The value of involving the public in addressing general societal concerns cannot be over emphasised. Society in general, but our most marginalised in particular, must be recognised as a key component in finding solutions to national problems. This ensures ownership of the solutions agreed to as it represents the will of the people. Credible and inclusive participatory processes lead to public trust in our representational role as the people’s voice.
As Parliamentarians, our contribution towards social cohesion and nation building is not only to ensure that we provide a platform for debates of national importance but also to ensure that the progressive realisation of economic and social rights is measurable and that targets and standards are in place. We also have to ensure access to justice is improved so that Rights are enforceable and work optimally to the benefit all our people.
Key to all the above is accountability. In South Africa, government consists of Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary. It is particularly with regard to oversight over the Executive that our Constitution envisages a stronger check, as it demands accountability to the democratically elected legislature.
It is for Parliament to ensure through our oversight role that the Bill of Rights and our key developmental commitments are truly reflected in policies and national budgets of government. The exercise of our oversight function is therefore not only a fault-finding process, but it is also focused on the proactive detection of problem areas and to provide solutions.
The Portfolio Committees of the National Assembly play a key role in this and are specifically tasked to ‘maintain oversight of the exercise within its portfolio of national executive authority and any executive organ of State falling within its portfolio’. Our Rules also empowers Portfolio Committees to ‘monitor, investigate, enquire into and make recommendations concerning any such executive organ of state… including the legislative program, budget, rationalisation, restructuring, functioning, organisation, structure, staff and policies of such organ of state…’
The willingness of an Executive to subject itself to the oversight of Parliament is the recognition and confirmation that Parliament provides democratic integrity to governance matters. Parliament is therefore the central institution for accountability of government as it gives legitimacy to the actions and decisions of the Executive when subjected to its oversight processes.
What happened yesterday in Egypt is a clear demonstration of what happens when the actions of the Executive are not legitimised by a democratic Parliament. I support the call by the Inter-Parliamentary Union for the immediate return to democracy in Egypt and the establishment of a strong parliament that is fully representative of Egyptian society. The IPU also called on the authorities to immediately organise free and fair elections while upholding the rule of law and defending an impartial judiciary.
Accountability as we know has an in-built tension, but these checks and balances are necessary safeguards in a democratic and developmental state.
In apartheid South Africa, while Parliament was supreme and its laws could not be challenged, it was neither democratic nor did it represent the people. Today however, while our Parliament is legitimate and democratic, it the Constitution that is supreme.
Thus while Parliament is accountable to the people, the courts may intervene to ensure that the actions of both Parliament and the Executive are within the bounds of the Constitution. This separation of powers is fundamental in ensuring and safeguarding the transformational vision of the Constitution.
It was in this sense that I emphasized in my 2012 Budget Speech that Parliament must take care that the laws that it passes are within the letter and spirit of the Constitution. In so doing, we preserve not only the separation of powers but also the independence of the judiciary, as we do not force courts to intervene in our internal arrangements or because our conduct is lacking.
In our maturing democracy there is nevertheless respect for the various roles that each arm has to play. Thus while the courts are the ultimate guardian of the Constitution to ensure that the constitutional obligations are fulfilled, the Constitutional Court has emphasised that 167(4) of the Constitution conferred exclusive jurisdiction on the Constitutional Court. It stated that ‘in a number of crucial political areas…to preserve the comity between the judicial branch of government’ and the other branches of government by ensuring that ‘only the highest court in constitutional matters intrudes into the domain of the other branches of government”.
The Constitutional Court itself said that courts must be conscious of the vital limits on judicial authority and the Constitution’s design to leave certain matters to other branches of government. They too must observe the constitutional limits of their authority. This means that the judiciary should not interfere in the processes of other branches of government unless to do so is mandated by the Constitution.
Parliament for its part contributes to the comity of relations with the courts and the Rules of Parliament provides that no member shall refer to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending’ or that ‘no member shall reflect upon the competence or honor of a judge of a superior court except upon a substantive motion in the House alleging facts which, if true, would in the opinion of the Speaker prima facie warrant such a decision.
Naturally there have been many times since 1994 when the Constitutional Court had to keep the Executive and indeed Parliament in check! This is proof that the seeds of accountability and governance have been cemented. Yes, accountability does contain an inbuilt tension, but this must be healthy and viewed with maturity.
Here, one remembers the words of former President Mandela who said I always recall how one of the first judgments in the Constitutional Court was around a matter in which I was involved as the President of the country, and the President of the Constitutional Court, regardless of the fact that he was once my lawyer, ruled against me. It was then clear to me that South Africa was in safe hands with that Court standing and operating at the apex of our democracy.
Once more, congratulations to Professor Plaaitjies for his contribution to our body politic. It is indeed an inheritance worth protecting. I am continually inspired by the words of Amilcar Cabral who reminds us that we must preserve for our children the best that we have learned, they are the flowers of our struggle. Madiba, the founder father of our democracy himself often reminded us that the youth are the future and we must do all in our power to ensure their success at all levels. Today is the 26th day that our icon is in hospital and our thoughts, well wishes and prayers are with him.
I thank you.
