<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.w3.org/2000/08/w3c-synd/style.css" type="text/css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
    <channel>
        <title>Polity.org.za | Constitutional Court</title>
        <description><![CDATA[Polity.org.za offers a unique take on news, with a focus on political, legal, economic and social issues in South Africa and Africa, as well as international affairs. Polity strives to provide our readers reliable and objective reporting on important issues that drive our society.]]></description>
        <link>https://www.polity.org.za/page/constitutional-court</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 04:01:35 +0200</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
        <item>
            <title> Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/economic-freedom-fighters-and-another-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-cct-3524-2026-zacc-17-8-may-2026-2026-05-08</link>
            <description><![CDATA[[1]  In this application, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM) challenge the constitutional validity of rule 129I of the Ninth Edition of the Rules of the National Assembly (NA Rules) and the National Assembly’s vote on 13 December 2022 (NA vote) to not refer the Independent Panel’s (Panel) Report[1] to the Impeachment Committee.  There are three judgments. [2]  The first judgment is written by Maya CJ, with Madlanga ADCJ, Rogers J and Theron J concurring.  It finds that this Court enjoys exclusive jurisdiction over the challenge to the validity of rule 129I as well as the related challenge to the validity of the NA vote.  It also determines that the challenges are not moot and that the delay in bringing the challenge to the NA vote can be overlooked.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2026 15:14:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>720894</a_id>
        <updated>1778246177</updated>
        <published>1778246040</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001270752_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        <attachments><attachment><url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/96554_doc-20260508-wa0005..pdf</url><size>8254626</size><title> Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT 35/24) [2026] ZACC 17 (8 May 2026) </title></attachment></attachments>
        <media:group><media:content url="https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/96554_doc-20260508-wa0005..pdf" fileSize="8254626" type="video" medium="video" expression="full"><media:description type="plain"> Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT 35/24) [2026] ZACC 17 (8 May 2026) </media:description></media:content></media:group>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Socialist Agenda of Dispossessed Africans v Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/socialist-agenda-of-dispossessed-africans-v-minister-of-cooperative-governance-and-traditional-affairs-cct-27923-2025-zacc-26-2025-11-21</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii [1]            Is the practice of sortition by casting lots as a deadlock-breaking mechanism for the establishment of an executive committee of a municipal council constitutionally offensive?  That is the crisp question that arises in these confirmation proceedings.  The High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria (High Court), declared section 43(2)(c) of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act[1] (Act) inconsistent with sections 19(3) and 160(8) of the Constitution, and thus invalid and unconstitutional.[2]  The order of invalidity was suspended for a period of 18 months and the order was referred to this Court for confirmation.  It did so in terms of section 167(5) read with section 172(2)(d) of the Constitution.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2025 14:37:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>710568</a_id>
        <updated>1763728758</updated>
        <published>1763728620</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001240335_resized_legallawjudiciarycourt1022scales.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Municipal Employees Pension Fund v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/municipal-employees-pension-fund-v-city-of-johannesburg-metropolitan-municipality-and-others-cct-27423-2025-zacc-23-2025-10-24</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii [1]            The applicant, the Municipal Employees Pension Fund (MEPF), seeks leave to appeal the judgment and order of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg (High Court).  The High Court dismissed the applicant’s application solely on the basis that the applicant did not have the requisite locus standi[1] (legal standing) to seek a declaratory order that the third respondent’s rezoning application had lapsed prior to its purported approval, or to seek, in the alternative, a review and setting aside of a decision by the first respondent to approve the third respondent’s rezoning application relating to certain immovable property.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2025 14:44:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>708545</a_id>
        <updated>1761309966</updated>
        <published>1761309840</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001234314_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Corruption Watch (RF) NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT 333/23) [2025] ZACC 15</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/corruption-watch-rf-npc-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-cct-33323-2025-zacc-15-2025-08-01</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  The right of members of the public to participate meaningfully in democratic governance is a hallmark of our constitutional democracy.  Public involvement in the legislative and other processes of all three spheres of government is not merely a fashionable accessory; it is a thread woven into the fabric of our democracy.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 14:29:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>702688</a_id>
        <updated>1754051610</updated>
        <published>1754051340</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001216688_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>President of the Republic of South Africa v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/president-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-cct-27819-2025-zacc-12-2025-07-25</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Read the FULL judgment on Saflii On application for direct access for supplementary just and equitable relief, the following order is made: 1. Pending the coming into effect of legislation that cures the defects causing the constitutional invalidity identified in AmaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services [2021] ZACC 3.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:34:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>702193</a_id>
        <updated>1753446973</updated>
        <published>1753446840</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001215229_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blind SA v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT 300/24) [2025] ZACC 9 </title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/blind-sa-v-president-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-and-others-cct-30024-2025-zacc-9-2025-05-09</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  INTELLECTUAL – Copyright – Blind and visually impaired – Access to materials by providing an exception to copyright for such persons and those assisting them on a non-profit basis – Amendment to Copyright Act 98 of 1978 – As interim measure, court read in section 13A – Suspension period expired without promulgation of legislation curing defect – Lapsing creating rights vacuum – Act shall be deemed to include section 19D pending legislation remedying the constitutional defects.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2025 14:30:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>696694</a_id>
        <updated>1746793891</updated>
        <published>1746793800</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001199318_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Democratic Alliance v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (CCT 184/23) [2025] ZACC 8</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/democratic-alliance-v-minister-of-home-affairs-and-another-cct-18423-2025-zacc-8-2025-05-07</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Read the full judgment on Saflii [1]            In Chisuse,[1] this Court observed that “[c]itizenship is the gateway through which a number of rights in the Constitution can be accessed.  It enables a person to enjoy freedom of movement, freedom of trade, and political representation.”[2]  This case concerns a constitutional challenge against section 6(1)(a) (the impugned provision) of the South African Citizenship Act[3] (the Act).  That provision causes South African citizens to lose their citizenship automatically if they voluntarily acquire citizenship in another country, unless they have prior permission from the Minister of Home Affairs.  In relevant part, the impugned provision reads:]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 09:56:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>696410</a_id>
        <updated>1746604713</updated>
        <published>1746604560</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001198693_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary221022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another v Richards Bay Coal Terminal ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/commissioner-for-the-south-african-revenue-service-and-another-v-richards-bay-coal-terminal-pty-ltd-cct-10423-2025-zacc-3-2025-04-04</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Statutory appeal remedy versus judicial review – Rule 53 record – Taxpayer must demonstrate compelling reasons justifying review – Courts below disposed of matter on basis that High Court’s review jurisdiction was not ousted – Failed to satisfy itself that respondents advanced sufficient reasons entitled to proceed by way of review – Erred by not considering whether respondent justified exercise of review jurisdiction in light of availability of wide appeal – Appeal upheld – Matter remitted for redetermination – Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964, s 47(9)(e).]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 10:46:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>694519</a_id>
        <updated>1743756475</updated>
        <published>1743756360</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001193097_resized_legalgavellawlawyer1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Govan Mbeki Local Municipality v Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others; ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/govan-mbeki-local-municipality-v-glencore-operations-south-africa-pty-ltd-and-others-emalahleni-local-municipality-v-glencore-operations-south-africa-pty-ltd-and-others-cct-18922-cct-19122-2024-zacc-25-2024-11-22</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  1]   This matter concerns municipal by laws which attempt to enforce municipal planning schemes by preventing the registration of transfer of properties without proof that there has been full compliance with all municipal planning requirements in respect of the properties in question.  The applicant municipalities both adopted municipal planning by-laws containing transfer embargoes along these lines.  The Mpumalanga Division of the High Court, Middelburg (High Court) and the Supreme Court of Appeal declared the transfer embargo provisions of the municipalities’ by-laws to be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.  The applicant municipalities now appeal to this Court against the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:52:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>686421</a_id>
        <updated>1732280083</updated>
        <published>1732279920</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001170085_resized_legalgavellawlawyer1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>President of the Republic of South Africa v Sigcau and Others (CCT 282/22) [2024] ZACC 21</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/president-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-v-sigcau-and-others-cct-28222-2024-zacc-21-2024-10-04</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]  This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment and order of the Supreme Court of Appeal.  The matter concerns the historical determination of the rightful King of amaMpondo community.  I will often refer to the parties who share the common name Sigcau and other parties frequently mentioned, using their first names.  I do so for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity and do not intend to disrespect any of them.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2024 15:16:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>683044</a_id>
        <updated>1728047875</updated>
        <published>1728047760</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001160538_resized_legallawjudiciarycourt1022scales.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
