Minister Siviwe Gwarube says BELA Act is being implemented despite ongoing work on regulations
Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube says the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act is already being actively implemented, even as work continues on the finalisation of supporting regulations.
Addressing Parliament's portfolio committee on Tuesday during the 2025/26 Budget Vote, Gwarube said her department had rolled out extensive support to provinces and districts to ensure the Act's smooth implementation since it came into effect on December 24, 2024.
'This support has included training of provincial and district officials, the development of interim guidelines and the development of an extensive suite of draft regulations to further support implementation,' she said.
Gwarube confirmed that the first two regulations , focused on admissions and school capacity , will be published for public comment in the coming weeks. She stressed the Department of Basic Education's (DBE) commitment to a "legal and policy framework that is responsive and fit for purpose."
However, the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education expressed concern over delays in the drafting of the full set of regulations.
Committee Chairperson Joy Maimela said: 'The majority of Members of the committee are of the view that deliberate attempts are being made to hold the full implementation of the BELA Act by delaying the drafting of regulations, especially those that speak to the two contentious sections. These regulations should provide the necessary clarity to implementers of the Act.'
The committee was particularly concerned about Sections 4 and 5 of the Act, which relate to school admission and language policy—issues that remain contentious. Although additional time had been given for stakeholders to reach consensus, no agreement was reached, and the Act was enacted with the understanding that detailed regulations would follow.
Maimela reminded Gwarube that the deadline for finalising the regulations was the end of June 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
an hour ago
- The Citizen
State can't argue against Zuma's chronic attempts at removing Downer
Zuma has suffered a series of losses in his bid to remove Downer due to alleged bias, claiming his continued involvement would compromise his right to a fair trial. Jacob Zuma's lawyer has insisted that the state cannot argue against the former president's repeated attempts at removing his arms deal prosecutor, Billy Downer, as part of his Stalingrad strategy. Zuma has suffered a series of losses in his bid to remove Downer due to alleged bias, claiming his continued involvement would compromise his right to a fair trial. Zuma lawyer: Stalingrad claim impermissible In papers filed at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), Zuma's attorney Bethuel Thusini argues that it is 'impermissible' for the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to again argue the former president was pushing for Downer's removal as part of a proven abusive campaign. In February 2025, Zuma's counsel argued against multiple court findings that the former president had employed Stalingrad legal tactics, pursuing futile cases and appeals with the sole aim of delaying his arms trial and avoiding his day in court. Thusini argues that this is because KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) High Court in Pietermaritzburg Judge Nkosinathi Chili stated in his ruling dismissing Zuma's latest attempt to remove Downer that he 'did not consider it appropriate to engage in the exercise of attributing blame to any party for the delay' in Zuma's trial. NPA's arguments According to Thusini, this amounts to Chili 'roundly' rejecting the state's Stalingrad argument, which has already been accepted by multiple other courts. Thusini suggests that, because Zuma's trial judge, Piet Koen, and Chili were both reluctant to make findings about the former president's Stalingrad strategy, this amounts to a rejection of the NPA's arguments. The NPA clearly does not accept that contention. ALSO READ: Zuma and Thales back in court for judgment on corruption charges Long complex trial Zuma's insistence that he was owed a long and complex ruling on his latest attempts to remove Downer – despite the fact that multiple courts had conclusively rejected his various complaints – was just one of many arguments he made to the SCA as part of his efforts to revive an appeal by Chili found to have no reasonable prospects of success. Zuma's eight failed attempts to force Downer's removal followed his unsuccessful efforts to privately prosecute the career state advocate and journalist Karn Maughan for the alleged violation of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act, through the sharing of publicly available court papers, which contained a sick note from one of the former president's doctors. Abuse of court That case was condemned as an 'abuse' by multiple courts and invalidated. The SCA found that the facts demonstrated 'that the private prosecution of Mr Downer is an abuse of the process of the court' because it was 'instituted as a further step in a sustained attempt by Mr Zuma to obstruct, delay and prevent his criminal trial' and 'to have Mr Downer removed as the prosecutor in Mr Zuma's trial'. This 'ulterior purpose' rendered the private prosecution unlawful, SCA Judge Nathan Ponnan said – before adding that the charges that Zuma had sought to pursue against Downer and this writer were 'patently a hopeless case' and 'obviously unsustainable'. In Zuma's SCA application to appeal the dismissal of his latest Downer removal bid, the former president maintains that the fact that his private prosecution of Downer was invalidated as an abuse 'was irrelevant in relation to the reasonableness or otherwise of [my] perception of bias on the part of Mr Downer'. ALSO READ: Zuma's lawyers argue for acquittal due to lengthy delays in the arms deal case [VIDEO] Downer removal In July, in papers filed before the SCA, Downer argued that the legal framework and arguments surrounding Zuma's application for leave to appeal to remove him are clear and well-established. 'As the High Court's refusal of Mr Zuma's attempt to have me removed as a prosecutor was a decision made during a criminal trial, it may be appealed only if and when Mr Zuma is convicted and sentenced.' Delays Downer also argues that Zuma's prosecution has been dragging on for the better part of 21 years. The delay has in large part been due to Mr Zuma's alleged 'Stalingrad strategy,' through which he allegedly seeks to avoid facing the charges against him. 'He does this by launching and prosecuting multiple challenges of various kinds. They have all failed. He then pursues them through successive attempts to appeal. When a challenge finally peters out, he initiates a fresh challenge through another round of litigation. The purpose is contrary to his public rhetoric that he wants his day in court – to avoid ever standing trial,' Downer said. Zuma appeal Downer argued it is crucial for the SCA to summarily dismiss Zuma's latest appeal bid. 'The state views this as yet another instalment in Zuma's alleged 'Stalingrad strategy', aimed at delaying the criminal trial indefinitely. The SCA's decision could either reinforce or challenge the judiciary's stance on curbing such tactics.' In response to the state's argument that the SCA should outright dismiss Zuma's latest appeal as yet another meritless attempt to further delay his trial, Thusini maintains that the former president's argument that Downer must be removed because he 'perceives' him to be biased is 'unanswerable'. ALSO READ: Downer dismisses Zuma's allegations of 'racist undertones' in legal strategy Arms deal The arms deal case was declared trial-ready three years ago but has been delayed by Zuma's repeated failed efforts to force the removal of Downer. The 81-year-old Zuma and French arms manufacturer Thales are facing multiple charges, including fraud‚ corruption, money laundering, and racketeering, in connection with the controversial multibillion-rand arms deal procurement concluded in the late 1990s while he was vice president. It is the state's case that Zuma was kept on a corrupt retainer by his former financial advisor, Schabir Shaik, who then allegedly used his political clout to further his own business interests. ALSO READ: Zuma unsuccessful in bid to change April 2025 arms deal trial date [VIDEO]
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
R10k just to show up: Fear of ‘Nkabane 2.0' as ANC Youth League leaders get hospital board positions
From 'tutor' to Gauteng hospitals board member, seemingly only on political connections. Fresh concerns of cronyism have rocked the Gauteng health sector after the reported appointment of several ANC Youth League (ANCYL) leaders to hospital boards in the province. As hospitals battle overcrowding, understaffing, corruption, low morale, and fierce battles over who should get healthcare, those tasked with managing the crisis were allegedly hired not for their expertise or experience but because of party connections. An unnamed ANCYL member told The Sunday Times that 'comrades were encouraged to apply', with the party promising to 'lobby' for them. Those appointed include Gauteng youth league deputy secretary Ziyanda Ncuru, deputy chair Jennifer Latifi, and Tshwane regional secretary Onkgopotse Thompson-Peete. PEC members Masabata Ramollo, Thabo Matome Twayise, Ashley Mabasa and Vuyisile Plaatjie were also listed, as was ANCYL member Khumo Thandeka. Paid for their expertise Some of those appointed held accounting and transport management qualifications, while others' only listed qualifications were as a 'tutor'. They will reportly receiving around R10 000 for each meeting they attend. Nkabane 2.0 A senior provincial government official said it was like 'Nkabane 2.0″, in reference to the saga around higher education minister Nobuhle Nkabane's appointment of the Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) board. The minister appointed several ANC-linked officials to the board, including minerals minister Gwede Mantashe's son, and several other fellow party associates. She withdrew the appointments, but not before digging in her heels and appearing to mislead Parliament. She told MPs that the selections were made by an 'independent' panel chaired by Advocate Terry Motau, who later denied any involvement in the process. Higher Education Chief Director for Seta Coordination, Mabuza Ngubane, was also listed on the panel but told Parliament on Friday that he had not accepted the appointment, attended any panel meetings or screened any candidates. The rest of the panel included officials from the Department of Higher Education, including Nkabane's chief of staff, Nelisiwe Semane, and advisor Asisipho Solani. Nkabane remains in office despite significant pressure on President Cyril Ramaphosa to suspend or fire here. The DA has laid a criminal complaint against the minister and also reported her to both the Public Protector and Parliament's Ethics Committee. Additional reporting by Molefe Seeletsa
IOL News
2 days ago
- IOL News
City of Cape Town ready to square off against National Government over Public Procurement Act
Mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis Image: Supplied The Constitutional Court has opened the ring for a sparring match between the City of Cape Town and National government, by granting the City direct access to challenge the controversial Public Procurement Act, a case with potentially far-reaching consequences for the autonomy of municipalities and the future of local service delivery across South Africa. The case, which now heads to the country's highest court, revolves around both procedural and substantive concerns: that the Act was passed unlawfully, and that its implementation would severely constrain municipalities' ability to respond quickly to critical infrastructure needs. Chief Justice Mandisa Maya issued directions on 14 July, giving national government until 8 August to file its answering affidavit. The City has until 22 August to respond. The Presidency has confirmed it will make its position clear in those legal filings. Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya told Weekend Argus: 'Our responses will be contained in our papers, which will be made known against the court set deadline.' For the City of Cape Town, the case is not merely a legal formality. Mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis described the court's decision to grant direct access as a crucial development. 'We welcome the Concourt granting direct access to hear this vital matter. 'We believe the Act was passed unlawfully, with fatal shortcomings in public participation and parliament's procedures.' The City's application contends that the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) vote that passed the Bill was flawed because seven of nine provincial delegations did not have valid final mandates. This alone, the City argues, is grounds for the legislation to be invalidated. However, Mayor Hill-Lewis emphasised that beyond procedural defects, the impact of the law on everyday service delivery is at the heart of their opposition. 'Beyond these issues, the Act will slow down local service delivery and make it much harder for municipalities to procure quickly in response to local needs. "Local government must be able to act swiftly to resolve urgent water, sanitation, electrical, waste, and environmental issues. Instead, this bill will slow down municipalities via a massive new red tape burden and interference from other spheres of government. This is unconstitutional, and undermines local government's direct accountability to serving residents.' The Constitutional Court made a ruling this past week Image: File In a comprehensive set of written responses to Weekend Argus, the City expanded on specific operational concerns. These include restrictions on municipalities' ability to procure emergency services without central approval, and the creation of a single national Public Procurement Office (PPO), which will assume oversight of municipal procurement systems. 'Specialised services or goods might be needed for urgent repairs to water, sewer or electricity infrastructure that may pose serious environmental risk or danger to residents. In these cases for example, municipalities will no longer have the power to lawfully deviate from procurement regulations for urgent service delivery without centralised approval via the centralised national Public Procurement Office (PPO).' The City warned that if the PPO database fails or is delayed, procurement for urgent services at municipal level could grind to a halt across the country. Added to this, the legislation prevents municipalities from maintaining their own supplier databases or making payments outside the central system. These concerns are amplified by the cost and complexity of implementing the law. While the Act is not yet fully operational, the City says National Treasury is still in the process of establishing the necessary regulations and systems. 'The Act is not yet in full effect as the necessary regulations and systems are still being established by National Treasury.' Even so, the City is already anticipating the financial and bureaucratic burden that will follow if the legislation stands. 'Yes because there will likely be human resource costs and other operational expenses required to cope with the major new red tape and compliance burden.' The legislation introduces 36 new regulatory requirements still to be promulgated. Municipal officials warn these changes will create delays, legal uncertainty, and reduced flexibility to deal with time-sensitive contracts. One such example is the potential for long and complex appeals against tenders — which, under the Act, would block the finalisation of contracts until the appeals process concludes. The City says this will discourage public-private partnerships and hinder investment in infrastructure, particularly in fast-growing urban areas. Cape Town has not stood alone in its opposition. The City maintains that it has engaged every possible forum to raise its objections, including public participation processes, submissions to the South African Local Government Association (SALGA), and intergovernmental meetings. 'The City has opposed the legislation at every stage including via public participation and SALGA channels. The City is acting in the interests of all municipalities.' At the heart of the City's legal argument lies a constitutional principle: that local government is not merely a service provider for national mandates, but a constitutionally distinct and autonomous sphere with direct accountability to residents. 'As a starting point, local government has constitutional autonomy and direct obligations to residents which the bill unconstitutionally infringes, aside from any and all further negative impacts.' [email protected] Weekend Argus
