Controversial WEGE Bill is adopted by Committee amid protest

The Portfolio Committee on Women, Children and People with Disabilities adopted the Women Empowerment Gender Equality (WEGE) Bill on Tuesday, 26 February, after controversial in-committee protests by the Sex Workers Education and Advocacy Taskforce (SWEAT).

According to a statement released by Parliament, this Bill “marks yet another important step towards the actualisation of the empowerment of women as well as the strengthening of existing equality laws”. The Bill aims to ensure 50% representation of women in all decision-making structures in government and private entities.

However, many women and gender equality activists around the country beg to differ, saying that the WEGE Bill will fail women because it caters to women working only in senior positions and marginalises others. Amid complaints that the Bill lacked clarity in some of its definitions, other concerns were that the Bill was duplicating existing legislation such as the Employment Equity Act and the BBBEE Act, and that the Bill did not address certain traditional / religious practices that perpetuate women’s inequality. The Committee also heard that the Bill failed to address the rights of rural women, who would continue to be undermined by skewed land ownership, limited access to credit and constrained opportunities for economic advancement.

The Committee was also called out for not broadening the consultations, resulting in rural women, women with disabilities and other groups of marginalised women being excluded from the process. There was a general concern that women were not a homogenous group and experienced different forms of discrimination, which called for solutions that were tailored to these differences.

At an earlier meeting this year, Danielle Coleman, a Human Rights and Advocacy Fellow for SWEAT, told the Committee that there are structural barriers that make this Bill irrelevant for women in the informal sector. Without the decriminalisation of sex work, the WEGE Bill will work as double victimisation and will have the reverse effect.

The Committee agreed that the contentious clause 7(2), which had caused much dissension amongst Members, would be removed. The clause states that “Despite any other law, all political parties must develop and implement measures for the progressive realisation of a minimum of 50% representation and meaningful participation of women in decision-making positions and structures”.

The DA and the ACDP were in agreement that if there was a reference in the clause to having a 50% representation of women in political parties, it would still be problematic, as it would hinder the ability of people, including women, to vote as they wished. Parliamentary Legal Advisers agreed, saying that the Committee could not justifiably put a limitation on voting, as it infringed on peoples right to freedom of association. After a brief debate about the constitutionality of the clause, it was deleted.

The DA and the IFP abstained from voting on the Bill.

Read the full report on the deliberations on the Bill here.

Read the full report on the adoption of the Bill here.