Abstract
There is currently no uniform social security dispute resolution system in South Africa due to the piecemeal fashion in which schemes were established or protection against individual risks regulated. The result is that each statute provides for its own dispute resolution institution(s) and processes. There are also various gaps and challenges in the current social security dispute resolution systems, some of these relating to the uncoordinated and fragmented nature of the system; inaccessibility of some social security institutions; inappropriateness of some current appeal institutions; the lack of a systematic approach in establishing appeal institutions; a limited scope of jurisdiction and powers of adjudication institutions; inconsistencies in review and/or appeal provisions in various laws; an unavailability of alternative dispute resolution procedures; and an absence of institutional independence of adjudication institutions or forums. The system is therefore in need of reform. In developing an appropriate system, much can be learned from innovative experiences in comparative South African non-social security jurisdictions on the establishment of effective and efficient dispute resolution frameworks. Dispute resolution systems in the labour relations, business competition regulation and consumer protection jurisdictions have been established to realise the constitutional rights of their users (especially the rights of access to justice, to a fair trial and to just administrative action). They thus provide a benchmark for the development of the South African social security dispute resolution system.
Highlights
The South African social security adjudication system is in dire need of reform
There are various other gaps and challenges that the current South African social security dispute resolution system faces. Some of these challenges relate to the inaccessibility of some social security institutions; the inappropriateness of some current appeal institutions; the lack of a systematic approach in establishing appeal institutions; the limited scope of jurisdiction and powers of adjudication institutions; inconsistencies in review and/or appeal provisions in various laws; the unavailability of alternative dispute resolution procedures; and the absence of the institutional independence of adjudication institutions or forums
They are apparently not specialised enough to deal effectively with social security matters. Appeals to such courts may pose difficulties for aggrieved persons, due inter alia to limited access to the courts especially for indigent persons; undue delays that characterise court proceedings; and the technical and legalistic basis upon which cases are decided. This leads to the contention that: the current South African social security system has a large backlog in terms of the pool of beneficiaries
Summary
The South African social security adjudication system is in dire need of reform. This is due to the various challenges bedevilling it. Selected dispute resolution systems investigated are the labour relations system;[1] the business competition regulation jurisdiction;[2] and the consumer protection jurisdiction.[3] The institutions, mechanisms and procedures in these jurisdictions, established to resolve disputes that may arise, are reviewed to provide a possible benchmark for comparison with the current social security dispute resolution framework. These institutions and their procedures have been established to realise the constitutional rights of their users (especially the rights of access to justice and to a fair trial). Such mechanisms and procedures could provide guidelines for the development of the social security dispute resolution system
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.