Pretoria - Sakeliga will no longer approach the court on an urgent basis against what it deems to be an attempt by Health Minister Dr Joe Phaahla to make Covid-19 regulations permanent.
Instead, the business organisation will pursue its application later on the normal court roll.
The urgent application was due to be heard this week in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, but Sakeliga said it had asked for another date for the matter to be heard later this year on the normal roll.
The application for new dates on a non-urgent basis follows the minister’s repeal of almost all his May 4 Covid-19 surveillance regulations.
Sakeliga said the minister backtracked on the regulations, and today the public and businesses could operate with almost no Covid-19 restrictions.
From a legal point of view, this necessitated removal of the case from the urgent court roll.
Sakeliga said the recent surveillance regulations were an attempt to continue the once temporary restrictions (under the National State of Disaster for Covid-19) on a permanent basis (under the National Health Act).
“It entailed mask mandates, gathering restrictions, travel restrictions, vaccination-based gathering restrictions and requirements that businesses monitor, track and report on members of the public’s personal health information,” it said.
“In his answering affidavit to the application, the minister contended he had done nothing wrong and was justified in his actions. He now alleges his regulations were always intended to be only a ‘temporary stop-gap measure’ and that he had in any case repealed them in June.
“He said our case was not urgent. He insisted that we withdraw it or else he’d demand a cost order against us.
“Notably, the minister chose to remain silent on many aspects of our founding affidavits.
“He failed to disclose a defence relating to the unconstitutionality of his regulations and the way in which his department ignored or dismissed almost all public comments,” Sakeliga said.
It added that contrary to the minister’s demands that the application be withdrawn, Sakeliga’s litigation remained crucial.
“Unless his regulations are struck down, businesses and the public in South Africa remain at risk of debilitating, stringent and sudden restrictions as part of the government’s arbitrary Covid-19 containment efforts. And unless his deceptive public consultation process is challenged in court, public consultation processes in South Africa in general stand to become meaningless,” Sakeliga said.
It said that despite the minister’s repeal of certain sections of the May regulations, he failed to repeal his regulation declaring Covid-19 to be a level 2 notifiable medical condition.
“This maintains absurd obligations on medical professionals, businesses and members of the public to ‘immediately report’ even mere suspected contacts of persons with Covid-19 to their nearest health establishment, under threat of 10 years of imprisonment.”
Sakeliga said the South African Medical Association, in its submission during the public participation process, rejected the notifiable medical condition classification and said “making Covid-19 a notifiable medical condition inevitably leads to mandatory measures on individuals, as is required for dealing with all other notifiable diseases”.
It maintained that these regulations were unenforceable and out of touch with reality.
Sakeliga said it would thus continue with its legal bid, which included reviewing and setting aside any unrepealed parts of the May 4 regulations.
It will also ask that the public consultation process the minister followed be declared unlawful and unconstitutional and set aside.
Pretoria News