The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Health, Ms Faith Muthambi, notes the judgment delivered today by the Constitutional Court in the matter of Solidarity Trade Union and Others v Minister of Health and Others.
 
The Court has confirmed the order of constitutional invalidity issued by the High Court, declaring sections 36 to 40 of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 unconstitutional, on the grounds that they are irrational and unjustifiably limit the right to freely choose a trade, occupation or profession, as protected by section 22 of the Constitution. The effect of the judgment is that sections 36 to 40 have been severed from the Act, while the remainder of the National Health Act remains valid, intact, and fully operational.
 
Ms Muthambi said the committee respects the authority of the Constitutional Court as South Africa’s apex court and affirms its commitment to uphold the principles of constitutional supremacy and the rule of law. She said the judgment provides important legal guidance on the constitutional limits of legislative intervention, particularly where measures adopted by the state have implications for fundamental rights and freedoms. While the objective of ensuring equitable access to healthcare services remains both necessary and constitutionally grounded, the Court found that the certificate of need provisions failed to satisfy the required standards of rationality and proportionality.
 
The Chairperson emphasised that the judgment should be viewed within the broader context of South Africa’s ongoing efforts to address long‑standing structural inequalities within the healthcare system. Access to quality healthcare remains uneven across geographic and socio‑economic lines, and the state retains a clear constitutional obligation to progressively realise this right for all. In this regard, the need for meaningful and sustainable transformative interventions within the health sector remains urgent and undisputed.
 
The committee acknowledges that the impugned provisions were intended to advance a more equitable distribution of healthcare services and improve planning and resource allocation throughout the country. However, the Constitutional Court identified critical shortcomings in the legislative framework, including the absence of adequate safeguards and the conferral of overly broad discretionary powers on administrative authorities.
 
In light of the judgment, the committee will invite the Minister of Health and officials from the Department of Health to brief it on the implications and consequences of the ruling, including its impact on existing policy frameworks, future legislative interventions and broader health system reforms.

Issued by Parliamentary Communication Services on behalf of the chairperson of the portfolio committee on Health, Faith Muthambi