CCT16/12

[2012] ZACC 27

2012 (6) SA 588 (CC)

2013 (1) BCLR 14 (CC)

Mogoeng CJ Majority judgment

Yacoob J dissenting judgment

9 October 2012

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3671

Application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Western Cape High Court: Oriani-Ambrosini v Sisulu [2011] ZAWCHC 501

Application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Western Cape High Court, Cape Town, challenging the constitutional validity of the Rules of the National Assembly that require an individual member of the Assembly to obtain permission from the Assembly before introducing a Bill. The majority held that section 55(1)(b) of the Constitution empowers individual members of the Assembly to initiate or prepare legislation; and that section 73(2) of the Constitution empowers members to introduce Bills. It held that these sections, read with section 57 of the Constitution, which empowers the Assembly to make rules regulating its process, do not allow the making of rules that vitiate the exercise of the constitutional powers of members. This, it held, was the effect of the permission requirement. The majority therefore held that the Rules were unconstitutional to this extent. The order of the High Court was set aside and the impugned parts of the Rules were declared constitutionally invalid and severed from the remainder of the Rules. A dissent held that the application should be dismissed because the applicant failed to challenge the Rules that regulate the introduction of a Bill in the Assembly, instead attacking the Rules that deal with the initiation or preparation of legislation. Further, it was held that the Rules were in any event reasonably capable of an interpretation that would save them from a declaration of constitutional invalidity. Majority: Mogoeng CJ (Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Khampepe J, Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J and Van der Westhuizen J concurring). Dissent: Jafta J (Yacoob J concurring).