Share

Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act 'impairs dignity of unmarried fathers' - ConCourt

accreditation
0:00
play article
Subscribers can listen to this article
Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act has been declared unconstitutional.
Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act has been declared unconstitutional.
Getty Images
  • The Constitutional Court has declared a section of the Births and Deaths Registration Act unconstitutional.
  • The section does not allow an unmarried father to register his child's birth under his surname, unless the mother gives consent or is present.
  • A ConCourt judge says there is no justification for differentiating between married and unmarried fathers.

The Constitutional Court has declared section 10 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act - which does not allow an unmarried father to register his child's birth under his surname, unless the mother is present or gives consent - unconstitutional. 

In a judgment by Justice Margaret Victor on Wednesday, which was read out by Justice Steven Majiedt, the court found there was no justification for differentiating between married and unmarried fathers.

"Section 10 of the act impairs the dignity of unmarried fathers, whose bonds with their children are deemed less worthy than the children of married parents," Majiedt said. 

READ | 6 father-daughter relationships we love

The apex court confirmed a 2020 ruling by the Eastern Cape High Court, which found the act invalid and inconsistent.

Father Menzile Lawrence Naki approached the court after the Department of Home Affairs refused to register his child under his surname because the mother was an undocumented Democratic Republic of Congo national.

Consent

The department would also not allow him to register the birth, without the mother's consent.

Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng was one of two dissenting justices. He acknowledged that the act discriminated against unmarried fathers, but held the discrimination was reasonable, justifiable and fair. 

"The chief justice holds that children are vulnerable and their best interests are of paramount importance in issues that concern them have to be addressed.

"The chief justice further reasons that they must be protected and not exposed to the risks of being easily claimed and adopted by people, whose relationship with them or subsequently to be in their lives, has been established," said Majiedt.

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For 14 free days, you can 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. Thereafter you will be billed R75 per month. You can cancel anytime and if you cancel within 14 days you won't be billed. 
Subscribe to News24
heading
description
username
Show Comments ()
Voting Booth
What do you think about the SA government investigating Chinese online fashion retailer Shein over its business practices?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
It’s a waste of resources that should go to local trade
30% - 1489 votes
I think Shein is being unfairly targeted
10% - 486 votes
Dig up the dirt! We must look out for SA retailers
42% - 2098 votes
I don’t mind, as long as the customer doesn’t suffer
18% - 889 votes
Vote
Rand - Dollar
18.50
+0.2%
Rand - Pound
22.63
+0.1%
Rand - Euro
19.91
+0.2%
Rand - Aus dollar
12.39
-0.2%
Rand - Yen
0.14
+0.1%
Platinum
977.27
-0.7%
Palladium
1,406.71
0.0%
Gold
1,943.28
+0.1%
Silver
22.43
+0.1%
Brent Crude
75.32
+2.0%
Top 40
68,799
0.0%
All Share
74,271
0.0%
Resource 10
65,660
0.0%
Industrial 25
99,818
0.0%
Financial 15
15,066
0.0%
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.

LEARN MORE