The Pretoria High Court will on Wednesday hear an application brought by President Cyril Ramaphosa and the government seeking to reinstate their opposition in the constitutional damages case.

The case, filed by 25 families and survivors of apartheid-era gross human rights violations, seeks accountability for political interference in the prosecution of crimes recommended by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

IOL previously reported that the families of victims who were forcibly disappeared or killed during apartheid, supported by the Foundation for Human Rights (FHR), filed an application against Ramaphosa and the government earlier this year.

They are seeking R167 million in constitutional damages for the state’s “gross failure.” The families say there was “a gross violation of their human rights as the state failed to investigate and/or prosecute the cases referred by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to the National Prosecuting Authority.”

The government is also requesting a postponement or stay of the case pending the outcome of a judicial commission of inquiry established on May 29, 2025.

The families, survivors, and the FHR, who have welcomed the establishment of the commission in principle, have expressed strong opposition to the government’s attempt to delay the matter.

They argue that the newly established commission of inquiry cannot replace the courts in determining constitutional rights violations or awarding remedies.

According to the FHR, “the commission’s mandate should be limited to examining the mechanics of political interference, how it occurred, and who was implicated.”

They reject the inclusion of issues relating to rights violations and constitutional damages, arguing that such matters fall within the jurisdiction of the courts, not an advisory body.

“The commission of inquiry, being an advisory and fact-finding body, cannot substitute the role of the courts in determining disputes concerning constitutional rights,” the FHR said.

“The commission lacks the authority to adjudicate rights violations or award remedies and may only make recommendations to the President, who is both a respondent in the court proceedings and a key figure in the commission itself.”

FHR and Law firm Webber Wentzel welcomed a ruling by Judge Millar dismissing an application by former President Thabo Mbeki and former Minister of Justice Bridgette Mabandla to intervene in the case.

The court confirmed that political interference in the prosecution of apartheid-era TRC cases was already an established fact. 

“Accordingly, it cannot be in issue that there was political interference in the prosecution of the TRC cases.

”Our Courts have found this to be so, and those findings stand and are binding. For this reason, the argument advanced for the Calata applicants that there would be no need for a specific finding against either Mr. Mbeki or Ms Mabandla, is to my mind entirely sound. The issue has been decided.”

This dual role, the families argue, represents a fundamental conflict of interest. “The President effectively becomes both a player and a referee,” said the FHR.

hope.ntanzi@iol.co.za

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.

IOL Politics 

Source link