Procedural justice as a feature of transformative substantive equality: Critical notes on Social Justice Coalition v Minister of Police (CC)

• Citation: (2024) 141 SALJ 349
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v141/i2a5
• Published date: 10 April 2024
• Pages: 349-390
• Author: Basson, G.B.
• Date: 10 April 2024

349

https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v141/i2a5

PROCEDURAL JUSTICE AS A FEATURE OF

TRANSFORMATIVE SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY:

CRITICAL NOTES ON SOCIAL JUSTICE

COALITION v MINISTER OF POLICE (CC)

GIDEON BURNET T BASSON†

Extraordinary Resea rch Fellow, Department of Public Law,

Stellenbosch University

The case of S ocial Just ice Coal ition v Min ister of Police 2022 (10) BCLR

1267 (CC) is concer ning. The litigants a nd the Constitution al Court sidest epped

the innovative and tra nsformative role that is envi saged for access to courts a nd judicial

proceedings and tha t is required by a substant ive conception o f equality underlyin g

impoverishe d peoples’ equality r ights. This ar ticle argues t hat procedural justi ce was

overlooked as a fea ture of transform ative substantive equa lity to be applied in a cl aim

relating to pover ty-based disc rimination. P rocedural justice i s vital, as impove rished

people encoun ter pervasive ec onomic, social, politic al and procedural barr iers to access ing

justice in variou s democratic for ums, including cou rts. To introduce procedural just ice

as an indispen sable feature of trans formative substan tive equality, I use the work of

the global justice th eorist, Nanc y Fraser. Fraser’s work prov ides formidable in sights

into developing th e existing constit utional framew ork to overcome th e bracketing of

the pervasive m aterial and so cial inequaliti es that are chara cteristic of l iberal rights

claims. By focusin g on courts and t he procedurally inno vative demands of equ ality

proceedings, I argue t hat the judgment is a wo rrying illust ration of the deepen ing of

impoverishe d people’s democratic era sure. The judgment i s procedurally form alistic,

eectively absolv ing courts f rom their acco untability func tion for redressing p overty

and inequality.

Poverty di scrim ination – t ransfor mative su bstanti ve equalit y – procedur al

justice

I IN TRO DUC TIO N

Access to justice i s an indis pensable fu nction of South Af rica’s emerging

constitut ional democrac y, which sets itself out to b e historic ally sel f-

conscious of its pa st legali sed exclusion of raci al groups f rom the politica l

process and di sparate acce ss to judicia l forums .1 However, access to justice

across form al and in forma l adjudicator y processes rem ains super cial for

† BA LLB LLM (Stel lenbosch). https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8836-0702. Sec-

tions of th is artic le were developed in my LL M thesis conduc ted under the

supervi sion of Profess ors Sandr a Liebenberg a nd Henk Botha . I want to tha nk

them for their i ntellect ual mentor ship, ski lled super vision an d curiosit y about

this res earch project. I a lso want to express my ad miration for Tegan Snyman fo r

her steadf ast support a nd comments on pr evious dr afts of t his ar ticle. My than ks

also go to t wo anonymous reviewers for t heir crit ique and insightfu l suggestions.

Any rema ining er rors are mine alone.

1 Ml ungwana v S 2019 (1) BCLR 88 (CC) (‘Mlungwana’) pa ras 63– 5; Geo

Budlender ‘Access to cou rts’ (200 4) 121 SALJ 339 at 341. For the import ance

(2024) 141 SALJ 349

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

350 (2024) 141 THE SOU TH AFRICAN LAW JOUR NAL

https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v141/i2a5

South Afr ica’s impoverished major ity due to severa l social, econom ic,

procedural a nd institutiona l barriers .2 The outcome of Social Justice Coalition

v Minister of Police3 (‘SJC (C C)’ ) is therefor e a matter of concer n as the

Constitut ional Cour t sidestepped the i nnovative and t ransfor mative role

envisage d for courts and jud icial procee dings , and that is dem anded by a

substant ive conception of equal ity underly ing impoverished people’s right

to non-disc rim ination conta ined in the const itutiona l equal ity rig hts4

and the Promotion of Equ alit y and Prevention of Unf air Discr imi nation

Act 4 of 2000 (‘PE PUDA’ or ‘the Act’). This article a sks whether g reater

awareness of procedu ral just ice as an impor tant feat ure of substant ive

equalit y would have requi red the court to a djudicate the ca se dierent ly.

Part II of the ar ticle outl ines the case’s fact ual backg round and

elaborates on t he surround ing circu mstance s, illu strati ng the democrat ic

exclusion of impoveris hed people in South Af rica. Par t III proceeds

to exami ne the inabi lity of lib eral democr atic inst itutional r elations to

transfor m poverty and inequa lity, which stubbornly pe rsist in our countr y.

The article u ses the proposa ls of the globa l justice theor ist, Nanc y Fraser,

to develop the substa ntive and procedur al featur es of the rig ht to equalit y

and non-di scrim ination a nd to explore its tr ansform ative potentia l in a

highl y strati ed society such a s South Afr ica. Af ter consideri ng Fraser’s

proposals , part IV eva luates whether t he equalit y right s, the provision s

of PEPUDA, and the rela ted role that PEPU DA prescribes for jud icial

forums en able the court s to be a forum where memb ers of subordi nated

groups can cha llenge t heir exclusion and d iscrim inat ion. Final ly, part V

of the article c ritica lly evalu ates the mi nority and m ajority jud gments in

SJC (CC) agai nst the innovative proce dures and tra nsformat ive institution al

role envisage d for courts when a d iscri minat ion claim is i nstitute d.

II FACTS AND LEGAL IS SUES

The SJC (CC) case has its or igin s several decad es ago, when

impoverished peo ple and civil so ciety orga nisat ions began to ch allenge

the dispropor tionately h igh levels of cr ime and violence th at poor and

black people encounter in tow nships.5 T he high cr ime levels in the se

of the Constit ution’s histor ical memor y see Karl E K lare ‘L egal cu lture and

trans formati ve constitut ionalism’ (1998) 14 SAJHR 146 at 153.

2 Mohlomi v Ministe r of Defence 1997 (1) SA 124 (CC) para 14; Lesley Green baum

‘Access to justice for a ll: A real ity or un ful lled expectations? ’(2020) 53 De Ju re

248; Magd alena Sepúlvelda Ca rmona & Kate Dona ld ‘Access to just ice for persons

livin g in poverty: A human r ights approach’ Fi nland Mini stry for Foreign A airs

brochure (2014) 13–30.

3 2022 (10) BCLR 1267 (CC).

4 Section 9 of the C onstitution of the Republ ic of South Africa, 1996 cont ains

ve subsection s that must be r ead together : Minister of Fina nce v Van Heerden

2004 (6) SA 121 (CC) (‘Van Heerden’) paras 28, 136.

5 The court chron icles this h istory in SJC (CC) supr a note 3 paras 9 –17.

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

TRA NSFORM ATIVE S UBSTAN TIVE E QUALITY 3 51

https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v141/i2a5

areas stem f rom a combinat ion of factors, i ncluding the h istory of spa tial

apartheid t hat has left v ulnera ble communit ies geograph icall y exposed to

crim inal g ang activ ities as wel l as tax i turf w ars.6 In add ition, inade quate

infra struct ure, such as the l ack of light ing in public a reas and the soc io-

economic chal lenges of women and ch ildren hav ing to wal k to water

outlets, toilet s and schools, ex pose impoveri shed communit ies to a

high ri sk of crime, s exual v iolence and human t racki ng.7 On top of

these condition s, there is a wide spread stig ma that im poverished people

are substa nce abusers and cr imi nals, le ading to the c rim inali sation of

homelessness, pol ice brutal ity, and even violent m ilita ry inter ventions

in impover ished commu nitie s.8 Furt hermore, inst itutions such a s the

South Afr ican Police Ser vice (‘SAP S’) operate under a n outdated pol icy

that skews resou rces to wealth ier and pri mari ly white neighb ourhoods,

reinforcing racia l subordination.9

Tenacious citizens and com munit y police foru ms, supported by c ivil

society org anisat ions, led to the K hayelitsha Com miss ion of Inquir y

(‘KCI’), which investigate d inadequat e and inappropr iate polici ng and

the breakdown in r elations bet ween communit ies and the pol ice in

Khayelitsha.10 One of the KCI’s ndings wa s that the resou rce allocat ion

policy produces a n ‘in-bu ilt bias’ ag ainst poor a nd black commun ities,

and the KCI recommended the u rgent revis ion of the resource al location

po li cy. 11 After yea rs of unsucce ssful en gagements b etween civi l society

organi sations and t he police to implement the re commendation s of the

KCI, the applicants approa ched the Western Cape Equalit y Court (‘WCC’)

to declare th at the nationa l and provinc ial resource a llocat ion system

discr imin ates aga inst black and po or people on the ground s of race and

pov er t y.12 Their m ain arg ument was th at the system i s based on report ed

crimes , which ignored the u nderrepor ting of cr imes in i mpoverished

communit ies, and unfair ly favours wealthier are as in its resource al location

6 C ommission of Inq uiry Towards a Safer K hayelitsha (2014) 30–46 (‘K hayelitsha

Commi ssion of Inquiry Repor t’); Ziyanda Stuurm an Can We Be Safe? The Future

of Policing in Sout h Africa (2021) 46 –53, 88–124.

7 Kh ayelitsha C ommis sion of Inquir y Report ibid a t 38–40 ; Pumla D ineo

Gqola Female Fear Factory: Gen der and Patria rchy Under Rac ial Capitalism (2 022)

chs 1 and 5.

8 Christopher McMichael S hoot to Kill: Police an d Power in South Af rica (2022)

18, 74–95. See Khosa v Ministe r of Defence 2 020 (3) SA 190 (GP), where the court

found the South A frican Nationa l Defence Force (‘SANDF’) sold iers’ conduct in

beating M r Collins K hosa to death to enforce lo ckdown restrict ions was unlawf ul

and ordered the S ANDF to prevent f urther police and ar my brutality.

9 Khayelitsha C ommis sion of Inquiry Report op c it note 6 at 448– 9.

10 Ibid at 1–17.

11 Ibid at 392.

12 Socia l Justice Coa lition Appl icants’ Head s of Arg ument for Social Justice

Coalition v Ministe r of Police (WCC) pa ra 8.2.

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd