By Amy Musgrave
Civil society groups have welcomed a judgment by the high court in Pretoria that regulations implemented by the SA Social Security Agency (Sassa) in 2023 on the social relief of distress (SRD) grant are unconstitutional.
The court ruled on Thursday that a number of regulations, which limited access to the grant of R370, were also invalid.
It said that regulations relating to the grant applications only being allowed to be lodged online, and the definitions of “income” and “financial support” must be amended as they restricted access to the grant to fewer people and Sassa’s strict appeal’s process.
The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and #PaytheGrants lodged a court application challenging the constitutionality and lawfulness of the steps the state had taken, or failed to take, in carrying out its commitment to provide the grant to adults of a working age who needed it.
The court also declared that Sassa’s failure to pay successful grant applicants on time, or at all, as unconstitutional and unlawful.
In its judgment, it cited Section 27 of the Constitution, which provided that everyone has the right to access social security.
It said it was immaterial whether a member of a person’s family was assisting them as that did not absolve the state from performing its duty and meeting its obligations in terms of the section.
The court went further to describe as unfathomable that the social development minister and Sassa would justify an irrational and arbitrary verification procedure that excluded people who were eligible and entitled to access the SRD grant.
The IEJ, the Socio-Economic Rights Institute and #PaytheGrants said the judgment was a resounding victory for fairness, dignity and constitutional rights.
They said the judgment found the procedural barriers that have been put in place to prevent eligible persons in desperate need from accessing the SRD grant were unlawful.
In addition, the court agreed with their challenge “to the rolling back of the grant in terms of the low and arbitrary value and means-test threshold”. They had argued that this contradicted the government’s constitutional obligation to progressively advance the right to social assistance “within the maximum available resources”.
“We are thrilled by this outcome, which not only provides desperately needed immediate relief, but also serves as an affirmation of the government’s duty to the most vulnerable,” the IEJ’s Gilad Isaacs said.
“For far too long the National Treasury has used austerity policy to block and undermine the advancement of constitutional rights and the upliftment of the majority. The SRD grant regulations are a clear example of this.
“The judgment refuses to allow the National Treasury to justify indignities visited on the most vulnerable by claiming that the enjoyment of our rights is ‘unaffordable’.”
He said the judgment was especially important given the persistent unemployment and hunger crisis in South Africa, and that the remedies granted would materially impact over half the population, both directly and indirectly.
Earlier this week, Sassa suspended grant payments to all accounts it suspected to be fraudulent to allow a process where beneficiaries would have to verify their details.
INSIDE POLITICS
