ConCourt to decide whether Bathabile Dlamini must personally pay costs in Sassa debacle

Former social development minister Bathabile Dlamini. (Leon Sadik, Gallo Images, City Press, file)
Former social development minister Bathabile Dlamini. (Leon Sadik, Gallo Images, City Press, file)

The Constitutional Court is expected to decide on Thursday whether former social development minister Bathabile Dlamini should be held personally liable for her handling of last year's SA Social Security Agency (Sassa) debacle.

The court is expected to rule on costs in terms of section 38 of the Superior Courts Act and determine Dlamini's role and responsibility in the establishment and functioning of the work streams referred to in affidavits filed by all the parties.

The case, which was brought by non-governmental organisations Black Sash and Freedom Under Law, has been ongoing for several years.

READ: How Bathabile Dlamini dodged a ConCourt bullet… for now

In 2014, the court ruled that the contract the Sassa had signed with social grants distributor Cash Paymaster Services (CPS) two years prior was illegal and invalid.

Sassa later returned to court because it was concerned that it would not be able to distribute cash payments to recipients because its new distributor, the SA Post Office was not able to do so.

Around 2.8 million beneficiaries - roughly 26% of the scheme - receive their grants in cash.

Earlier this year, the court gave CPS another six months to pay beneficiaries who received their grants in cash. 

READ: Dlamini files affidavit on why she should not personally pay for Sassa case

It also ordered Dlamini and Sassa's acting CEO Pearl Bhengu to explain why they should not be held liable for the legal costs, in their personal capacities.

Last month the Constitutional Court ruled that Sassa and Bhengu were liable for costs relating to the extension of the application.

Bhengu was found liable in her official capacity as former Sassa acting CEO, but not in her personal capacity. 

The court found that Dlamini's actions were "not sufficient to conclude that it constitutes bad faith or gross negligence".

KEEP UPDATED on the latest news by subscribing to our FREE newsletter.

- FOLLOW News24 on Twitter

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For only R75 per month, you have access to a world of in-depth analyses, investigative journalism, top opinions and a range of features. Journalism strengthens democracy. Invest in the future today.
Subscribe to News24
Lockdown For
DAYS
HRS
MINS
Voting Booth
When assisting your child with remote learning this year, did you:
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
Follow the school's comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) curriculum?
13% - 136 votes
Adjust the CSE curriculum to suit the family's morals?
24% - 252 votes
Ignore the schools CSE programme and do your own teaching?
63% - 657 votes
Vote
ZAR/USD
15.25
(-0.22)
ZAR/GBP
20.36
(-0.28)
ZAR/EUR
18.27
(-0.22)
ZAR/AUD
11.28
(-0.06)
ZAR/JPY
0.15
(-0.44)
Gold
1769.34
(-0.95)
Silver
22.09
(-2.35)
Platinum
955.78
(-0.75)
Brent Crude
47.90
(0.00)
Palladium
2402.00
(-0.44)
All Share
57822.50
(-0.17)
Top 40
53021.58
(-0.12)
Financial 15
11577.71
(-0.58)
Industrial 25
79894.95
(-0.12)
Resource 10
52804.55
(+0.03)
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes morningstar logo