Abstract
A full sixteen years after the coming into force of the 1996 Constitution, Parliament responded to the constitutional obligation to regulate and monitor, by legislative and other means, the use of official languages by adopting the Use of Official Languages Act 12 of 2012. The Act represents a very limited normative appreciation of this constitutional instruction. The official language clause of the Constitution expresses a normative commitment regarding the positive affirmation of linguistic diversity, which is directly informed by and closely aligned to the core normative values of the Constitution. The Constitution’s positive evaluation of difference, including linguistic difference, inter alia, flows from the values of substantive equality, equal citizenship, dignity and proportionality. However, the way in which the Act institutionalises the promotion of inclusive linguistic diversity does not reflect an unambiguous recognition of this obligation being normatively embedded in the foundational value structure of the Constitution. The real responsibility for decisions regarding official language use is located in the policy-making competence of non-independent administrative bodies. The Act itself is devoid of instructive standards of its own to guide administrative decision-making regarding official language use. This results in the responsibility for making the most important normative choices regarding the use of official languages not being reserved for the legislative process, but entrusted to non-independent advisory administrative bodies. The nature of the Act confirms that it never was the intention of the government to be bound by legislation in this respect. This modus operandi is democratically deficient and compromises both the separation of powers and the principle of legal certainty as fundamental tenets of the rule of law. 
Highlights
The Use of Official Languages Act1 ("the Act") is meant to "regulate and monitor" the use of official languages in terms of arguably one of the most inclusive official language arrangements of any constitution currently in force
If Justice Sachs was correct that the principle of inclusivity shines through the language provisions of the Constitution, the question is: does it shine through the Act, which after all was meant to implement those provisions? Secondly, does the Act represent clear progress in the quest for equity, clarity and predictability in official language use?
Apart from lacking the necessary institutional competence, these bodies will have to function in terms of a very limited, and to some extent, confused normative framework for the promotion of multilingualism
Summary
The Use of Official Languages Act ("the Act") is meant to "regulate and monitor" the use of official languages in terms of arguably one of the most inclusive official language arrangements of any constitution currently in force. The constitutional analysis will provide the background for the consideration of how the Act has given body to this commitment in its interpretation of the section 6 instruction to regulate and monitor the use of official languages This involves an inquiry into both the extent to which inclusive public enterprise will use for the purposes of government, provided that at least two of the official languages identified must be indigenous languages of historically diminished use and status. Linguistic diversity defines the main objectives of the Act, as well as its institutionalisation in the implementation forms and structures envisaged by the Act
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
