Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi has backtracked and “withdrawn statements that may have been offensive” after appearing to cast aspersions on the partiality of the Constitutional Court judges presiding over challenges to the National Health Insurance Act last week, reports Business Day.
A statement from the Health Department on Friday said “the Minister’s remarks should not be construed as second-guessing the judiciary’s ability to remain impartial when adjudicating challenges to the constitutionality of the National Health Insurance”.
“The Minister wishes to state categorically that he has full confidence and trusts in the fairness and integrity of the judiciary and its commitment to upholding the rights enshrined in the constitution and the rule of law.”
Advocacy group Judges Matter had also asked him to apologise.
Talking to nurses in the Eastern Cape to mark International Nurses Day last Tuesday, the Minister had said the judges were “beneficiaries of the very system NHI sought to change”, this after attending top court hearing into challenges to the NHI Act brought separately by the Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF) and the Western Cape provincial government.
“I was looking at those judges, looking at them in their eyes,” said Motsoaledi. ”There is a medical aid called Parmed, and now I’m asking judges who have this benefit, please make a judgment over it. That’s the trouble I am having.”
Judges Matter legal researcher Mbekezeli Benjamin called it highly unusual for a member of the executive to comment on a matter under consideration. “For him to enter into this space and make these kinds of remarks looks like interference in the courts,” he said.
Motsoaledi had created public sentiment suggesting that if the top court judges ruled against him, they were doing so to protect their private interests, he added, and the Minister’s failure to retract his remarks when challenged by DA MP Karl le Roux in Parliament on Wednesday potentially aggravated the matter.
The Minister’s comments violated his constitutional duty to protect the independence of the courts as a member of the executive and as an MP, Benjamin said.
The DA had submitted a parliamentary question to President Cyril Ramaphosa asking whether he was satisfied that Motsoaledi’s conduct meets the standards set out in the executive ethics code, and if not, whether he would refer the matter to the public protector for further investigation.
DA spokesperson on justice and constitutional development Glynnis Breytenbach called Motsoaledi’s conduct “shockingly inappropriate”, saying that simply withdrawing his comments and apologising would not go far enough. “He would have to point out that it was a shocking (error of) judgment and shouldn’t be encouraged,” she said. “By suggesting judges are incapable of impartiality, the Minister has crossed a dangerous line.
“The Constitution gives judges the responsibility to decide whether laws are constitutional, without pressure from politicians. When a Minister suggests judges cannot be fair, it creates the impression he is trying to influence the outcome of the case,” she added.
Motsoaledi’s later statement was an attempt to clarify his comments about “judges, parliamentarians like himself, and many other prominent and well-to-do South Africans, being beneficiaries of the current unequal health system”.
“This reference was made to demonstrate the systemic challenges caused by gross inequalities within the country’s two-tiered health system, characterised by a well-resourced, heavily state subsidised, private sector which caters for a privileged minority, while the majority are dependent on an under-resourced public sector,” it read
“The Minister wishes to state categorically that he has full confidence and trusts in the fairness and integrity of the judiciary and its commitment to upholding the rights enshrined in the constitution and the rule of law.
“If by talking about disparities the Minister is understood to have been attacking the judges, the Minister would like to unreservedly apologise and withdraw whatever statements may have been offensive. The Minister wishes to reiterate he will not only accept but fully respect any verdict from the judges of our Constitutional Court,” the statement said.
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
Minister questions judges’ potential bias in NHI case
NHI public consultation under scrutiny in top court