Madam Speaker, indeed, for many a democrat in our country, for all in my party, all those who work for the wellbeing of our people in general, our women, our children, for the promotion and protection of their rights, I am here to lead in the debate around the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Bill - a very important piece of legislation for the promotion of the human rights of all our people, women and children in particular, the most vulnerable.
This legislation has been in the making for many years now. I had, earlier on in the day, during the media briefings of the JCPS cluster by my colleague the Deputy Minister, indicated that it has been in the making for 12 years. I would like to say, as a follow-up on that very remark, it may well be not exactly 12 years, that over the past years a lot of work has been done at tertiary institutions by my party, by NGOs and CBOs interested in the promotion of human rights, and in particular in the protection of women and children against violence. A body of knowledge has therefore been gathered and developed over this period of time, and it is submissions bearing this kind of detail relating to the safety of such persons that have been presented as submissions before the Portfolio Committee on Justice.
This Bill is informed by a lot of contributions from the parties that are participating in the portfolio committee or have participated over the years, CBOs and NGOs and other experts who made their submissions to the portfolio committee. The assumption one has to draw is that it is therefore as comprehensive as a Bill of this nature can be.
If one looks at the explanatory notes of the Bill, one realises the broad spectrum of coverage by the Bill from institutional arrangements to determining penalties related to sexual offences. It even includes new, modern notions such as having a national register for sex offenders, and also deals with issues related to post-exposure prophylaxis in cases where one is infected with HIV/Aids. It is therefore very wide.
My task today is twofold. As I introduce this legislation, I would firstly want to use the occasion to commend all those who have been involved over the years. Most importantly, I want to commend the Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development, my colleague adv De Lange, who was involved in the steering of the drafting of this Bill over many years until the current Chairperson, Fatima Chohan-Khota, took over and, of course, led very efficiently the process of consultation and drafting of this Bill. I, then in the same spirit, have to acknowledge the role played by my predecessors, both the late Dullah Omar and Penuel Maduna. In the time left I want to thank members of the department for the work that they have done.
The second part of my task is an undertaking that, as the Bill comes to pass, I should then use this occasion today to say that we will do our best to implement or lead in the implementation of this Bill. In parts, the Bill requires the setting up of very intricate and complex institutional arrangements and, obviously and correctly so, requires that there be a very close collaboration between interlinked departments.
Without much ado, I would like to make that commitment, that we will do our best, but then to say laws can only be enabling. If we are to eradicate violence in our society, we really need to do more. We must address those cultural practices in our society that lead to or exacerbate or cause the abuse of women. In other words, we must enjoin all those who fight for the promotion and advancement of women's human rights. We must also work hard towards the protection of our children. We must even work equally hard for stable family units, because, dear friends, as you may know, it is in the area of contact crime that we record higher levels of criminality and thus we must work towards strengthened and strong family units.
We have a lot to do, so whilst we do have enabling legislation, which prescribes punitive measures as well, we have to take the struggle to the streets, to our people. We have to enjoin all our people to be part of the fight against criminality in general and against the abuse of women and children in particular.
It is indeed opportune for us to advocate for elements of this Bill at this particular time, because, as we all know, we recognise in this month in particular, moving into December, the 16 Days of Activism for No Violence against Women and Children. The President always says this is a 365-day campaign and so perhaps we will pick on elements of this Bill to further educate our people on the advancement of the security of women and children and indeed all vulnerable persons in our country. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to address the House. [Applause.]
Hon members, I dedicate this speech this afternoon to all mothers who teach their sons to treasure girls, to all the wonderful South African men, fathers and husbands who love and protect their wives and daughters, and to rape victims everywhere who, having been violated in the most demeaning way, show amazing resilience to us all and who choose to live in dignity, thereby giving us all hope; hope for the boundlessness of the human spirit and hope for a world without violence. [Applause.]
While we do what we can in the legislation before us, there is, as the Minister says, a limitation to what legislation can achieve. By itself the Bill is not going to completely halt the high incidence of sexual violence reported every day at our police stations. If we hope to prevent sexual violence, we will have to look very deeply within ourselves, within our communities, and trace our historic path to this space in time.
Given our previous intimate relationship with violence, we might have failed to teach our children healthy alternatives to violence. Perhaps we have underestimated the devastating role played by alcohol and drugs, and we might even have misunderstood the effect of the permissive influences of images, films and advertisements so glaring in our daily lives. How else, members, do we explain the rape of an 18-month-old baby by a 15-year-old boy a few days ago in Limpopo province? How else do we explain the rape and setting alight of a seven-year-old not 20 kilometres away from this House? These are amongst the issues that, I think, need serious and committed thought from all of us. [Inaudible.] ... it really is very disturbing. Madam Deputy Speaker, I can't hear myself.
It is time, perhaps, that we became more vigilant as to the kinds of things that we feed into our children's minds, and in order for us to rescue our souls it is important that we try to find some time, perhaps, in this House to focus our thoughts more keenly in this regard.
The Bill before us aims in a single piece of legislation to deal with the law on sexual offences and related matters. Having said that, it is important to note that parts of the old Sexual Offences Act of 1957 that criminalised prostitution still remain, although it bears noting that the SA Law Commission is reviewing the legal aspects relating to adult prostitution and its implications in our new democracy.
We therefore, in this Bill, do not deal with adult prostitution, except as it pertains to the decision of the Constitutional Court in the Jordan case in which the hiring of the sexual services of prostitutes was found to be as much a crime as the crime of prostitution itself.
The Sexual Offences Act of 1957 is silent on the matter of the clients of prostitutes, and a grave inequality exists in how the criminal justice system treats the crime of prostitution. Currently in our country only prostitutes, who are mostly women, and not their clients, who are mostly men, are arrested, charged and prosecuted.
In a constitutional democracy it is an affront to treat women who are prostitutes as criminals, but not their clients as well. These clients in any case, for all intents and purposes, seem to go on blissfully with their otherwise model lives, completely unaffected.
The last prosecution in this country of a person who hired the services of a prostitute was in 1987 - gender bias in its most blatant form, I would say. Unless and until there is a comprehensive review of the law on prostitution and while such unequal practices exist, we in this House are compelled to act in a manner that accords with what is just and what is proper, and in accordance with the decision of the Constitutional Court.
The Bill is further divided into seven chapters, the first of which sets out certain definitions which relate to our attempt to modernise the law on sexual offences. The definition of sexual penetration, in particular, is a departure from the current common law definition and extends penetration to include oral and anal penetration. Consequently, the crime of rape, which is essentially the unlawful and intentional act of sexual penetration, is broadened significantly. Rape will now cover forced oral sex and the situation in which a man is sexually penetrated against his will or when an object such as a gun is used to penetrate a victim.
New crimes of compelled rape and compelled sexual assault are created to specifically deal with an instigator of the crime who compels, through the use of force or some other means, someone else to commit rape or sexual assault. This new crime is not to be confused with aiding, abetting or accomplice crimes.
A victim may also be compelled to engage in acts of self-penetration or acts of sexual self-degradation. The instigator will henceforth face a charge of compelled sexual self-assault. Compelling a husband to watch his wife or daughter being raped will henceforth require the perpetrators to be charged with both rape as well as the crime of compelling a person to witness a sexual offence. There are a host of other crimes in the chapter relating to adult persons flashing, exposure of child pornography, incest, bestiality and the crime of committing a sexual act with a corpse.
Crimes against children are dealt with specifically in recognition of the fact that children are vulnerable. Statutory rape and sexual assault are two crimes that have been preserved in this law to provide further protection to children between 12 and 16.
The Bill regards children under 12 as incapable of consenting to any sexual act. This means, of course, that children above 12 can factually consent. However, if the child is between the ages of 12 and 16 and the consent of the child has been established, any person found to have engaged in a sexual act with such a child will nonetheless be guilty of statutory rape or statutory sexual assault.
A very compelling case was made for the extension of this provision to children under the age of 18, and we did consider this. However, given the diversity of our society and the prevalence of sexual activity amongst children in the category between 16 and 18, it was felt that extending statutory rape and sexual assault in this way would have the unintended consequence of criminalising 16-year-olds to 18-year-olds engaging in sexual behaviour.
Statutory rape, we hope, will no longer apply to the proverbial teenage boy who, having been intimate with his teenage girlfriend, finds himself hauled to the police station by the girlfriend's irate father. Indeed, if prosecution is to follow in this kind of circumstance, both the young man as well as the young lady would have committed a crime, and both are now required to be charged. More and more, we hope the crime of statutory rape will be used to convict adults who entice and seduce young children into sexual behaviour.
Children and persons who are mentally disabled are the two categories which have been dealt with specifically in recognition of their inherent vulnerability. Persons who are mentally disabled are defined as those who are affected by any disorder or disability of the mind to the extent that they, at the time of the alleged commission of the offence, were unable to appreciate the nature and reasonably foreseeable consequences of a sexual act, unable to act in accordance with such appreciation, and unable to resist or communicate their unwillingness to participate in such an act.
Specific crimes created for both these vulnerable categories include sexual grooming, prostitution, benefiting or living off the proceeds of such prostitution, creating pornography using children or persons who are mentally disabled and benefiting financially from such pornography. Exposing children and persons who are mentally disabled to pornography and harmful material is now also criminalised. Both these vulnerable groups are further protected by the introduction of the register of sex offenders. This register will, hopefully, be in operation within six months of the Act being enacted.
The register will contain names of sex offenders who offend against children and persons with mental disabilities. The register will be established specifically to enable employers to screen potential employees who work with or have excess to children prior to employing them. The law provides that such employers must screen potential employees. Existing employees are enjoined to disclose any conviction, failing which they are liable to be criminally convicted and also lose their jobs.
Licensing authorities granting licences to businesses which provide supervision or care services to either of the vulnerable categories will be required to apply for a clearance for applicants prior to the relevant licences being granted. Likewise, people who adopt children or foster them are also in future to be cleared by the register.
It should at this juncture be stressed that this register is not a naming and shaming tool akin to the paedophile registers that operate in other countries. There are strict confidentiality provisions that are crafted to avoid the terrible experiences of those in other countries who have been falsely tagged because of administrative errors and commonly shared names.
As this register will contain names of offenders within our borders as well as without, it is hoped that it will evolve into a sound preventative and protective mechanism for our children and persons who are mentally disabled, and that our country will no longer be seen to be a safe haven for paedophiles.
In regard to treatment, the Bill provides for a whole protocol to be developed around the administration of post-exposure prophylaxis - Pep - to victims of certain sexual offences. In future, any such victim who may potentially have been exposed to the HI virus, who presents herself within 72 hours of the offence occurring at a designated clinic or police station and who lays a charge, will be provided with the Pep treatment.
The Compulsory HIV Testing of Alleged Sexual Offenders Bill of 2003 was collapsed into this Bill due to its close relationship with the main aim and purport of this Bill.
Provision is made for a mechanism to allow victims, who may have been exposed to the bodily fluids of a perpetrator, to obtain the HIV status of such offender whose identity may be known to them. Such a mechanism will kick in upon the granting of a court order. Criticisms have, inter alia, been raised to suggest that a negative result of the perpetrator would dissuade victims from receiving the Pep treatment. This argument, I believe, is a shocking assault on the intelligence of victims of sexual offences, who are mainly women.
While this mechanism is not perfect, it is certainly worthwhile. Its advantages to rape victims are obvious. Rape victims will be given information as to whether or not they have been exposed to the HI virus, and this is an important psychological tool.
Rape victims will also be empowered thereby to make certain decisions about their lives, lifestyles and loved ones. While there is no doubt that this provision will be challenged, we are confident that our courts will see the finely balanced checks and balances provided for in this regard.
Most unusually for legislation, we provide a comprehensive national policy framework in recognition of the fact that one of the most critical challenges in the criminal justice system is the lack of interdepartmental co-ordination with regard to sensitive and efficient service delivery, particularly when it comes to sexual offences.
The establishment of an intersectoral committee, consisting of the Directors-General of Justice, Social Welfare and Health, the National Commissioners of Police and Correctional Services and the National Director of Public Prosecutions, is meant to ensure the implementation of the objects of this Act.
The objects are, inter alia, to ensure intersectoral co-ordination and enhancement of service delivery at the level of our criminal justice system. If we succeed in the attainment of synergies in the criminal justice system, I want to submit that half of the battle against crime and sexual offenders in particular would have been won.
We have introduced in this Bill some changes to the law of procedure and evidence, which I don't have time to go into right now, but my colleague Mr J B Sibanyoni will be dealing with this at some length. I do, however, want to deal with one further very important aspect of this legislation, which is the transitional provision that we have included relating to human trafficking. Again, in a bizarre turn of events, the inclusion of this provision has been criticised by those who claim to be fighting for the protection of women and children. The crux of the argument seems to be that trafficking should be a stand-alone crime, while we only deal with it in the context of trafficking in persons for sexual purposes.
While it is true that human trafficking may be for purposes other than sexual exploitation - and, in that sense, the provisions could be said to be narrow in their scope - there is, however, an undeniable link between trafficking and sexual exploitation, in particular the prostitution of women and children.
Countries that have legalised prostitution rank as high or very high receivers of trafficked persons in the UN report on global trafficking published this year, while our own country, where prostitution is unlawful, and countries like Sweden, which regard prostitution as violence against women and children, rank far lower as potential receiver countries for trafficked persons.
I say again: there is an undeniable link between prostitution and human trafficking. This is a very sobering thought for those of us who are policy- makers and those of us who are listening, particularly in the light of the Law Commission's review on the matter of adult prostitution. As this is meant to be a transitional provision, it will be replaced once a comprehensive piece of law dealing with human trafficking is enacted. But, until then, these clauses that we have placed in the Bill will remain an important weapon in our efforts, alongside those of other countries, to eliminate human trafficking.
Finally, I want to take this opportunity in the last few minutes that I have left to thank, firstly, all those individuals who have made comments and who have made submissions to the portfolio committee. I believe that a lot of the good suggestions have, in fact, enhanced the quality of the Bill.
Secondly, I want to take the time to really recognise the sterling efforts of the legal drafters in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, in particular Mr Lawrence Bassett, Mr Henk du Preez, Ms Dalene Clark and Mr Hennie Potgieter, who have really gone over and above the call of duty and have worked weekends to try to get this Bill sorted. I do thank you very, very much. [Applause.]
Thanks also go to the Deputy Minister and the Minister for their guidance and assistance, and, lastly, thanks go to all the members of the portfolio committee who, when the rest of Parliament was away, were the only ones warming the seats of this House. Thank you for putting up with me and thank you for the dedication shown. I want to conclude by wishing everybody a happy festive season. Look after your children, and may it be a safe season for all of us. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Thank you, Madam Chair. In the same spirit that the Chair addressed this, can I likewise wish members of the House everything of the best over the festive season and may I congratulate you, Madam Chair, on your festive headgear.
Let me assure the House right at the start that the DA supports this Bill. We do not do it holding our noses, as many of us did when we supported the messy Civil Union Bill earlier in the week. The DA regards this legislation as an important reform measure, which is long overdue. The fact that we are rushing it through the National Assembly on this last day of the year's session, ahead of the sixteen days of activism against violence against women and children, is better than not doing it at all.
That having been said, it is certainly not a perfect piece of legislation, as the justice portfolio committee itself recognises, and that has been documented in detail in our report to the National Assembly on the agenda today.
A number of issues have been left hanging in the air. For instance, the criminalising of a person's nondisclosure of his or her HIV status has been left out for further consideration by the department.
The issue of adult prostitution has been dealt with in a piecemeal and possibly unsatisfactory way, the Constitutional Court's decision notwithstanding, partly because it is currently subject to a review by the SA Law Reform Commission, and the issue of rehabilitation of offenders has been left out for further study. Nevertheless, it is a vast improvement on what we had before.
An unanswered question is why we had to wait so long for the law dealing with sexual offences to be reformed. After all, the previous Sexual Offences Act dates way back to 1957. It is true that the SA Law Commission spent several years researching a new legal regime for sexual offences. I think the Minister mentioned that this Bill has been 12 years in the making.
However, the ANC government only introduced the new Bill to Parliament in 2003. This was extensively discussed and amended after 128 submissions were received on the draft Bill, and after a week of public hearings. The process, however, came to a halt in February 2004, ahead of the April general election. The Bill then failed to return to Parliament for two and a half years. Several promises by the Minister in the interim to bring the Bill back, given to me among other members during this period, failed to materialise. It appears the public outcry around the Zuma rape trial was persuasive in the Bill's return, which occurred shortly afterwards in June this year.
The Bill before the House is now very ambitious. Its object is to completely overhaul the law relating to sexual offences, as has been outlined by the Chair. It's far-reaching, comprehensive and a very complicated piece of legislation which breaks a lot of new ground.
Among other things, the Bill repeals the common law offence of rape and replaces it with the new expanded, nongender-specific statutory offence of rape applicable to all forms of sexual penetration. This quantum leap was necessary in terms of the Constitution and will establish South Africa's legislation as among the most progressive on sexual offences. Sexual assault, previously indecent assault, is similarly dealt with.
The Bill also creates a host of new statutory offences criminalising certain sexual acts as well as introducing new sexual offences against children and mentally disabled persons.
Perhaps one of the most positive aspects of the Bill is that it introduces a number of provisions intended to protect children against sexual predators, paedophiles and pornography. Importantly, and in line with the Constitution, the Bill eliminates the differentiation between the age of consent for boys and girls, so that it is now 16 for both. A troublesome aspect of this change, however, for children, boys particularly, between the ages of 16 and 18 is their vulnerability at this time to adult sexual predators, which has been pointed out in the justice committee's report, and we say that this aspect requires further research.
The Bill introduces new dimensions to the consequences of sexual offences in that it provides that certain services must be afforded by the state to rape victims who report the rape either at a police station or at a designated state hospital - for instance, the right to receive post- exposure prophylaxis against HIV infection at designated state hospitals within 72 hours and the right to apply for the alleged perpetrator to be tested for HIV.
These are important reforms, insisted upon by the portfolio committee as a result of pressure from civil society and the input from the SA Law Reform Commission. However, they do not, in our view, go far enough. One of the DA's main concerns is that the provisions ensuring that a rape victim or a child victim of sexual offence would be treated by the court as a vulnerable witness in the earlier version of the Bill, which served before Parliament previously, have now been removed from the Bill before us today. The DA believes these provisions are necessary to prevent secondary trauma.
It is true that the Criminal Procedure Act has been amended to include watered-down elements of the SA Law Reform Commission's original proposals in this regard, but in our view this is not sufficient protection. It has been argued that to afford complainants in rape and sexual assault cases this status would be too costly in terms of the extra facilities and services that need to be made available, but we do not accept that this is a good reason. All our experiences of sexual offences courts make the case for the inclusion of this provision; in fact, they cry out for it. Properly equipped sexual offences courts yield double the conviction rate of other courts.
Another important issue in the Bill is the establishment of a national register for sex offenders. This is regarded as controversial in some quarters, and creates wide and possibly burdensome obligations on those working with children, but the DA agrees that the establishment and maintenance of this register is vitally important for the better protection of vulnerable children and the mentally disabled.
And, for the first time, trafficking in persons for sexual purposes has been outlawed in legislation by way of an interim provision in the Bill, pending the finalisation of proposals by the SA Law Reform Commission. The inclusion of this transitional measure was initiated by the DA, as we had already promoted legislation by way of a private member's Bill and had made proposals to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, which had been accepted.
For all these reasons, we support the Bill. However, we have some reservations about certain aspects, particularly the late introduction of a provision criminalising the soliciting of sexual services from prostitutes, as we have indicated, and also a fairly dubious extraterritorial jurisdiction over sexual offenders, which, we believe, could possibly be contested in the Constitutional Court. But save for these problems we believe the Bill, though complicated, is satisfactory and a vast improvement on what we had before. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Chairperson, Sheila referred to those red things in your hair, and I just want to say they make you look very attractive and beautiful, and I hope this doesn't make me guilty of sexual harassment. [Laughter.]
The chairperson of the portfolio committee and Sheila, to some extent, have highlighted details of the Bill, and I therefore do not want to repeat what they have said. I only wish to deal with the Bill briefly and make some general comments.
With the introduction of this Bill, we've come to the end of a very long and difficult journey. No one worked harder during the past few years than the chairperson of the portfolio committee, who made an excellent speech today. We wish to thank you for that and also the staff who worked so hard, and even Johnny de Lange for a long period - thank you very much.
This Bill for the first time provides South Africa with a single comprehensive piece of legislation dealing with sexual offences. This is a great and historic event in the life of our criminal justice system. The point is that for decades a very large gap existed in our criminal law dealing with offences of a sexual nature. This lacuna meant for instance that the criminal offence of rape only applied to the rape of a woman by a man. This has caused considerable misery, especially where men have been raped by other men. Before today, this was not rape. Now it is, thanks to this Bill. The Bill finally closes the gap by expanding the definition of rape to include all forms of sexual penetration without consent, irrespective of gender.
We are especially grateful for the creation of the national register for sex offenders, which will fill another gap in our law, and this will hopefully in practice result in more protection for children against abuse.
In conclusion, I want to highlight one of the portfolio committee's main recommendations on the implementation of the Bill, namely that the department should launch a project that is aimed at the promotion and facilitation of training on the legislation and its implications. The department has to submit a detailed proposal on such a project to the committee, after consultation with all the relevant stakeholders. This is, in our opinion, a vital recommendation. All too often this House passes legislation that looks very good on paper, but sometimes these laws are almost unimplementable or are so difficult to implement and to understand that their objectives are never realised or are only partially realised.
The IFP supports the recommendation and calls on the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to present its proposals to Parliament as soon as possible. The IFP supports the Bill.
Chairperson, this Bill extensively and comprehensively reviews and amends all aspects of the law and its implementation relating to sexual offences. It deals with these in a single piece of legislation, based on the values of human dignity, equality and nonsexism as stated in the Freedom Charter of our people, which today lies at the heart of our constitutional democracy.
Chapter 5 of the Bill provides for certain services to certain victims of sexual offences, including affording a victim of certain sexual offences the right to require that the alleged perpetrator be tested for his or her HIV status.
I am mindful that HIV/Aids is a heavily contested terrain in South Africa today. It is not my intention to enter this discourse, save to say that our government's response to the challenge of HIV/Aids is not as narrow as in your medical model but a holistic and comprehensive approach, taking into consideration also the issues of underdevelopment, poverty and the status of women in particular in our society.
My purpose here is to explain, firstly, chapter 5 in a practical way so that victims might clearly understand the possible risk of HIV infection which they are exposed to in an encounter with the sexual offender and, secondly, what medical treatment and services they are entitled to as a result of such a violent encounter. Thirdly, the process provided for in this Bill to be followed affords victim the opportunity of knowing as soon as possible whether he or she might have contracted HIV. Fourthly, there are the constitutional implications of the rights to privacy, bodily and psychological integrity, and the right to access health care services and, fifthly, there is the right of every accused person, including an alleged sexual offender, in this regard to be presumed innocent until a court of law proves otherwise.
Without any doubt, the prevalence of sexual violence against persons, especially women and children, and the Aids pandemic in our country create the real possibility that sexual offenders having HIV might infect their victims with the virus when they commit sexual assaults of a penetrative nature.
Because our government is concerned about the risks which victims are exposed to, the Bill provides for a legal procedure for the compulsory testing of alleged sexual offenders. In essence, chapter 5 makes provision for medical treatment and advice for the victim, compulsory HIV testing of the alleged offender, procedures to be followed to procure such tests, the role of third parties with a material interest in this process and maintaining the confidentiality of the information.
In this regard the sexual offences Bill entitles the victim who has been exposed to risks of infection with HIV as a result of sexual assault to receive, at state expense, a post-exposure prophylaxis or Pep treatment at a health facility designated by the Minister of Health. It also entitles a victim to get free medical advice on the administering of Pep and to be supplied with a list of public health institutions which provide these services.
With regard to the application for compulsory HIV testing of the alleged offender, the victim or an interested party on behalf of the victim, may make an application to the magistrate for a court order directing that the alleged offender be tested for HIV.
If an interested party is involved, such an application must be with the written consent of the victim unless the victim is under the age of 14 years, mentally disabled, unconscious, under curatorship in terms of an order of court or a person whom the magistrate is satisfied is unable to provide the requested consent. The magistrate must consider the application in chambers as soon as possible. Moreover, a police official may, for the purposes of investigation, apply to the magistrate in whose jurisdiction the offence occurred for an order for compulsory HIV testing.
All of this may be done in the absence of the victim if the magistrate is of the opinion that there is prima facie evidence and that it is in the best interests of the victim.
The results of the test may not be communicated to any person other than, firstly, the victim or an interested person as defined in the Bill; secondly, the alleged offender; and thirdly, the investigating officer and, where applicable, a prosecutor.
The confidentiality of the results must be maintained and any test obtained with a false charge is an offence liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment not exceeding 3 years. Disclosure of the results with malicious intent or in a grossly negligent manner is an offence, liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 3 years.
Inspired by a vision to create and build a society based on the values of human dignity, freedom, equality and nonsexism, as expounded in the Freedom Charter, the ANC believes that incidents of sexual violence, particularly against women and children, undermine this vision.
Central in this regard is the right to freedom and security of the victim which includes, amongst other things, the right to bodily and psychological integrity, and the right to access health care services.
Sexual violence in the context of a serious HIV/Aids pandemic, as is the case in South Africa, severely undermines the victim's freedom, dignity and security of his or her person. This is the context in which the right of access to the HIV status of the alleged offender should be approached and assessed.
It is important to understand that the right to determine the HIV status of the alleged offender in appropriate circumstances would empower victims to gain some control over their lives at a time when they have been violated by sexual assault. It is precisely because of this that knowledge of the HIV Status of the alleged offender by the victim should be approached and understood.
It will inform and enhance the choices that victims have to make about the rest of their lives. It must be emphasised that there are real benefits for the victim in having knowledge about the HIV status of an alleged offender.
For instance, when there is the possibility of infection, it would assist the victim in making further choices as to whether or not to continue the post-exposure prophylaxis, or Pep treatment and also how they conduct themselves with regard to matters of sexual and reproductive activities.
Our democratic Parliament would be failing in its constitutional democracy if it did not also express concern for the constitutional rights of the alleged offender. Central in this regard is section 35 of the Constitution which provides, amongst other things, that every accused person, including the alleged sexual offender, be presumed innocent until a court of law pronounces on the matter.
Therefore, taking into account the constitutional guarantees, the sexual offences Bill creates the procedural mechanisms to safeguard and protect the constitutional rights of alleged offenders as follows. The application for compulsory HIV testing must be considered by the magistrate in chambers. The magistrate must be satisfied that there is prima facie evidence that (a) a sexual offence has been committed, (b) the victim may have been exposed to the body fluids of the alleged offender, and (c) no more than 90 calendar days have lapsed since the alleged offence occurred.
The alleged offender retains his or her right to apply to the High Court for a review of the order directing compulsory testing if that order was not granted in accordance with the prescribed requirements in the Bill.
In conclusion, I believe this is an excellent and modern piece of legislation that will adequately meet the needs of our society. However, the success of it hinges on the following: adequate conscientisation, education and training of all relevant role-players including the broader society.
The GCIS can play a crucial role to facilitate the public awareness part of this process. Thank you.
Chairperson, the amended sexual offences Bill is a step in the right direction but far more is needed to rediscover the moral fibre of our people. As with most of our crises, it is the grass-roots citizens that are the biggest victims of sexual offences.
According to police statistics, more than 55 000 rapes were reported in 2004. Clearly, this revision of our sexual offences law is a welcome part of the solution. The Bill's protection of vulnerable groups, such as children and those with mental disabilities, and its recognition of gender equity in the criminal justice system is laudable.
This legislation binds together the diverse components within the sphere of sexual offences. At the same time it builds a wider problem-solving outlook on potential scenarios for the survivors of sexual offences.
The ID therefore supports the sexual offences Bill. However, we must not forget that legislation is only one component of this process. With the 16 Days of Activism fast approaching, the ID calls on the government and opposition to promote more than just legislation. I thank you.
Madam Chairperson, Deputy Minister, South Africa reportedly has the highest rate of sexual offences in the world, with most rapes going unreported. The ACDP therefore welcomes and supports most of the provisions of this Bill.
There are numerous improvements as pointed out by previous speakers, which I will not repeat but which we support. However, we, together with thousands of people, churches and organisations who made similar submissions, believe that the age of consent for sexual acts should have been lifted from 16 to 18 years.
What is commonly referred to as statutory rape is a significant legal protection for vulnerable children. In most rape cases, adult predators claim that the victims consented. The victims then have to disprove consent, resulting in the secondary trauma of cross-examination in lengthy trials.
In increasing the age from 16 to 18 years, this legal protection would be extended to a broader and very vulnerable category of children who, in the event of a sexual offence, would merely have to prove that the sexual act took place to obtain a conviction. There would be no issue regarding consent.
Minors may also not enter binding contracts without parental guidance. They can only vote at the age of 18 years, and obtain drivers licenses, purchase alcohol and get married at that age. It is significant that the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Act seeks to lift the age of purchasing cigarettes from 16 to 18 years.
It must be inferred from this amendment that it is agreed that 16-year-old teenagers are less able to decide on the long-term health implications of smoking than 18-year-olds. Surely, the same argument should apply and is even more persuasive for sexual intercourse, which can result in a death sentence through HIV/Aids.
Whilst disappointed that our proposal was not accepted, we do understand counterarguments relating to the rationality test and that the whole issue of statutory rape charges could be at risk. I may agree that that risk should not be taken at that stage. We are encouraged that the portfolio committee resolved to look into this issue and that further research should be done on this issue.
In conclusion, our thanks to the Minister, Deputy Minister, Chairperson and the legal drafters for their hard work on this very important piece of legislation. Well done!
We wish to state that the ACDP will support this Bill subject to the reservations expressed. And a word of particular thanks to the Deputy Minister for considering this issue of age. I know it gave you some sleepless nights. But thank you for your kind consideration. I thank you.
Chairperson, hon members, my heart aches, and the pain makes my senses numb whenever I hear from the media that a baby - a child - has been raped. This is a serious state of affairs and it needs the involvement of all of us to fight this scourge.
At the end of 2005 it was reported that 50 children, including infants, are raped every day, and that in the period 2004 to 2005 55 114 cases of rape were reported in this country. What is disturbing is that 90% of child victims know their attackers and assaulters, who happen to be their relatives or friends of the family or neighbours and well-known community members.
In September 2006 it was revealed that children are now the victims of almost 50% of all rapes and attempted rapes in this country and that 20% of all these reported rapes were of children under the age of 11 years.
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development has been working hard to amend the criminal law to ensure that these matters I have referred to above change or are at least on the decrease. It is also believed that this is in line with section 28 of the Constitution of South Africa, which provides that children have a right to be protected from maltreatment, neglect, abuse and degradation, therefore closing the gaps that existed in the criminal law.
I rise, therefore, upholding these requirements and therefore wish, from the outset, to inform you guys out there that this Bill is going to put a stop to the belief that you have an entitlement to sex or to sexually violate women and children.
The Bill does not create only guilt for offences, but also provides for the establishment of a national register for sex offenders.
The sexual offences Bill codifies common law offences and creates specific offences in respect of sexual penetration, sexual violation, sexual exploitation and sexual grooming of children. It criminalises the exposing and displaying of all sexual organs and pornography to children. It also criminalises the displaying of female breasts to children. I know women like to take their children to the bathroom sometimes. I think it is time now that they have to stop that. Otherwise they are going to be in danger.
The Bill makes it an offence to compel a child to watch a sexual act by another person or other persons or masturbation or engage in an act of sexual penetration in the presence of the child, or any other acts of sexual violation.
Children should not be used for pornographic purposes. We have seen or heard of teachers who, instead of teaching the children entrusted to them, take pornographic pictures. This is an offence and has to stop.
Juxtaposed to these offences that are created by the Bill, as I have indicated, is the national register of sex offenders. The register is a reinforcement to the Bill in that it ensures that whosoever has been convicted of a sexual offence against a child will be recorded in the national register.
This applies to offenders who have committed the offence either before or after the commencement of the Bill, whether this has been done inside or outside the Republic or whether a court had found him guilty before or after the commencement of the Bill.
The highlights of the national register for sex offenders are that anyone who has been convicted of a sexual offence against a child will not be allowed to continue in his job.
Perhaps I should clarify which institutions are targeted. These are all institutions where there are children under the age of 12 - this includes crches, day-care centres, hospitals and, most importantly, schools.
Think of how many cases have been reported of educators who sexually violate and sexually abuse children at schools. Only yesterday in the Cape Argus it was reported that 11 teachers in the Western Cape have been charged with sexually related offences against children.
The Bill provides that anyone found guilty of such an offence should have his services terminated immediately. The hon Minister of Education, Comrade Pandor - I'm sorry that she is not here - I think is being vindicated by this Bill in her attempts to clear the schools of rot.
Any employer will be required to apply for a certificate from the registrar who will be the custodian of the national register, which will show whether any potential employee is recorded in the register as having committed a sexual offence against a child. Likewise, any employee who fails to disclose that he - I don't know whether I should say "she" as I've never heard about the "shes"- was convicted for a sexual offence against a child, will have their services terminated immediately. Even if an employee discovers that another employee committed a sexual offence against a child, he should terminate the services of such an employee.
If for some reasons services cannot be terminated immediately, the employee must be removed from a position where they will gain access to children.
Another highlight of the Bill is that if an employer fails to comply with any of the provisions in the register he or she is guilty of an offence, and would be liable to conviction.
In conclusion, I want to say that there is no place to hide with all the details of sexual offenders that are going to be contained in the national register. These include details of court processes, dates, and places of jurisdiction, whether local or foreign. This Bill will go a long way to deter sexual offences against children. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Madam Chair, the South African Medical Research Council has disclosed in its recent annual report that almost one fifth of South African men have raped a woman at least once in their lives. Hearing these statistics and voicing our support of South Africa's commitment to eradicate sexual violence, we strongly support this long-awaited Bill. Last week a little seven-year-old girl was taken to a field by a trusted family friend where she was raped, stabbed and then set alight. This girl has lived to tell of the horror and a 28-year-old stands in court today to justify his actions, or rather deny them. This is but one case out of many, clearly showing how sick and evil a society we live in. We come to the podium to denounce sexual violence and to speak of educating the people against sexual violence. We talk about taking it to schools and creating awareness and both preventing and protecting against sexual violence.
The MF believes that there are far more deep-seated issues as to what forms the fabric of South African society. It is shocking that the majority of sexual offences are committed by children on children, with an estimated 130 059 child sex offences that were processed by the state between 1999 and March 2006. We need to address the root cause of the problem before we can institute preventive and protective measures.
This Bill is certainly a step closer to that. However, punishment for such a horrific crime needs to be no bail and a harsh sentence if not castration. It is certainly a step forward to extend the definition of sexual violence and realise that both men and women can be victims or perpetrators.
Education on sexual offences is crucial to the future of this pandemic in South Africa. It is punishment that shall serve as the best deterrent in addressing the core that produces this violence and that shall conquer it. Prayers are sent to all these victims of sexual offences, for those are scars that could never heal, but justice shall prevail. This Bill is key to stamping out sexual violence. The MF thanks the committee chair and the team, including the Minister and the Deputy Minister, for their hard work and supports the sexual offences amendment Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Madam Chair and hon members, persons with mental disabilities often from one of the most vulnerable groups in our society. Often due to the nature of their disability, they are unable to properly express themselves and they have to rely on others to protect them and to speak out on their behalf.
During our deliberations on this Bill, what we heard from NGOs and the Human Rights Commission in particular, is that the sexual abuse of persons with mental disabilities often goes unnoticed for years. Only when it manifests in either HIV or pregnancy, does the abuse come to light. It also causes problems in criminal convictions and in prosecutions because persons with mental disabilities often have great difficulty in passing the evidentiary tests in court and therefore the conviction rates are generally low.
The Bill that is before the House today goes a long way in protecting the most vulnerable of the vulnerable. Chapter 4 of the Bill specifically has been drafted to protect persons with mental disabilities. We have created special crimes in this Bill, such as the crime of sexual exploitation of persons who are mentally disabled. What this would be, for example, is if a guardian, a teacher or a caregiver at home intentionally allows or permits the commission of a sexual act with a person who is mentally disabled.
Other specific crimes that have been created in chapter 4 include sexual grooming of persons who are mentally disabled, which would be, in other words, encouraging or enabling a third party to perform a sexual act with a mentally disabled person. Other crimes include the display or exposure of pornography or other harmful materials to persons who are mentally disabled, as well as the crime of using persons who are mentally disabled for pornographic purposes.
Persons with mental disabilities face numerous challenges. It is estimated that some 6% of our population lives with some form of mental disability. What makes these people enormously vulnerable to sexual violence and abuse are factors such as an inability to consent to sex, an inability to communicate their lack of consent or a possible lack of appreciation of the nature of the sexual act itself. Furthermore, reliance on caregivers and other people often leads to even greater vulnerability. This is where the new proposed national register for sex offenders which is created in the Bill will offer substantial protection to persons with mental disabilities. How the register will work is that any person who has been convicted of a sexual offence against a person who is mentally disabled may not be employed to work with or hold any position of authority, supervision or care over persons who are mentally disabled. So, the purpose of the register would be to inform an employer, such as a hospital, a care facility or an institution if any of the employees, or potential employees' names would appear on the register. It also places an obligation on the employees who have been convicted of such sexual offences to disclose these convictions without delay to their employer.
A society is often judged on the way in which we treat our most vulnerable groups. This Bill is an important tool in ensuring that people with mental disabilities are afforded the necessary protection in law so that they do not become victims of sexual abuse and violence. At a time when we are focusing on the 16 Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children, let us remember that legislation is but one element. What we are striving towards and what we are committed to is a criminal justice system which is sensitive to the needs of vulnerable groups and a society that treats victims of sexual violence with dignity and respect. In that, we take great pride in rising to support this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, the FD welcomes the amendment Bill. We particularly welcome the comprehensive and extensive review of all laws relating to sexual offences and the inclusion of all these offences in a single statute. We agree that women and children are particularly vulnerable and are more likely to become victims of sexual offences. South Africa has a relatively high incidence of sexual offences, especially against women and children. This is indicative of the moral decay in our society.
It is not only the duty of the religious leaders in churches, mosques and temples to teach against sexual sin, but parents, caregivers and teachers must all play an active role in sex education. One of the objects of this Bill, in clause 2(e)(iii), is to eradicate the relatively high incidence of sexual offences by facilitating a uniform and co-ordinated approach by relevant government departments in dealing with sexual offences.
Once this Bill has been passed and if government wants to demonstrate that it is serious about sexual offences, it must deal with sexual offences in our prisons that take place there on a daily basis, often with the knowledge of the prison warders. The report of the Jali Commission and other investigative reports have proven beyond reasonable doubt that male rape is rife in our prisons. With the passing of this Bill, a prisoner who has experienced rape in any of our prisons will be able to institute a substantial civil claim against our government if it can be proven that a government official such as a prison warder has been fully aware of the repeated sexual offences, but has taken no adequate precaution to separate offenders from their victims in prisons. A further object of the Bill states that relevant organs of the state must give proper recognition to the needs of victims of sexual offences through timeous investigation and prosecution. The FD therefore supports this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson and hon Members of Parliament, in this debate I am focusing on evidentiary matters as contained in chapter 7 of the Bill. In this regard, the Bill provides for the following. In section 58, it talks about evidence of previous consistent statements. This section permits courts to admit evidence of previous consistent statements in sexual offences, on condition that the courts should not draw a negative inference if no previous consistent statement was made. The effect of the previous statements is to support or corroborate the evidence given by the complainant in court. Such negative inferences are currently drawn, which result in the complainant being viewed with suspicion and disbelief, just because the complainant failed to report, at the first opportunity, the sexual act to any person in whom the complainant confides. This practice originated in medieval England where the perpetrator could defend himself on the grounds that the women did not raise the so-called "hue and cry" immediately after the alleged rape.
Section 59 deals with evidence of delay in reporting. The delay in reporting a sexual offence may no longer be held against the complainant. Not even the length of the delay may militate against the complainant's case. The Bill provides as follows, and I quote: ... the court may not draw any inference only from the length of any delay between the alleged commission of such offence and the reporting thereof.
Currently and previously, courts treated allegations of sexual misconduct with suspicion and where the complaint was reported earlier, it served to rebutt the suspicion in establishing a lack of consent. I quote section 60, which says that a court:
... may not treat the evidence of a complainant... with caution, on account of the nature of the offence.
This section creates certainty that the cautionary rule is no longer part of our law in South Africa. The section prohibits courts from treating the evidence of a complainant with caution for the reason that it relates to a sexual offence. The cautionary rule has been used in the past to test the evidence of complainants, mostly in rape cases. Whilst the rule provided a safety valve against false accusations of rape, it has been viewed as unfair to victims of rape when they are subjected to the test as to whether their complaints are genuine. It has also been regarded as discriminatory against women as most rape victims are women.
The law before 1998 was that there was a duty on the court to recognise the dangers or risk in relying on the evidence of a single witness, accomplices and witnesses in sexual offences. Courts sought some safeguard that might have the effect of reducing the risk of a wrong conviction. The effect of the cautionary rule was that magistrates or judges must be cautious when they analyse the evidence of a rape victim.
In conclusion, I want to say ...
... njengombana sibandamela emalangeni alitjhumi nasithandathu (16), weJima lokuLwisana nokuTlhoriswa kwaboMma nabeNtwana, kulitjhudu namhlanjesi sikhuluma begodu siphikisana ngomThethomlingwa lo. Umthetho lo uzakusiza ukulwisana nemiguruguru eqaliswe ebantwaneni nebantwini bengubo.
Abomma bafumana ubudisi ngekorweni yokusegela namkha ngekhotho. Ngebanga lokuqalisiswa khulu namkha lokuphenyisiswa khulu kobufakazi bukangazimbi okatiweko namkha otlhoriswe ngokomseme, abomma abanengi bayasaba ukuvela ngaphambili, babike bonyana bakatiwe.
Umphakathi esiphila kiwo uyakhethulula ngehlangothini labomma. Umthetho kufuneka ubavikele. UmThethomlingwa lo uzobakhuthaza bona bakhulume, balise ukuthula njengombana vane batjho bathi "Break the silence!" Ngamanye amezwi "Khuluma." (Translation of isiNdebele paragraphs follows.)
[... as we are getting closer to the 16 Days of Activism, a campaign to fight against children and women abuse, it is a pleasure today to talk about and debate this Bill. This Act will help to fight against women and child abuse.
Women experience difficultly in courts regarding the way they are cross- examined and the way in which investigations with regard to sexually abused victims are conducted. Most women are scared to come forward to report a rape.
The community we live in discriminates against women. The law must protect them. This Bill will encourage them to talk, and not be silent because they sometimes say, "Break the silence!" In other words, "Speak."]
Evidence of women complainants will no longer be viewed with suspicion.
Kafitjhazana ngifuna ukukhuluma ngekulumo eyethulwe ngumhlonitjhwa u-Sheila Camerer emalungana nokuthi senza umthetho namkha umlando omutjha eSewula Afrika wokuthengisa ngedini. Ngifuna ukutjho ukuthi silandela kwaphela nje isiqunto esathathwa yikhotho, lapho ikhotho iqala khona bonyana sesiphila esikhathini sokulingana namkha sedemokhrasi lapho kufanele ukuthi abantu namkha izelelesi zithathwe ngokulinganako, ngaphandle kokukhethulula ukuthi umuntu lo ungumma namkha umfazi.
Into leyo soke siyayivuma, kodwana siqale ikakhulukazi ukuthi Ekuphetheni, angiqalise kancani ekulumeni kamhlonitjhwa u-Steve Swart, yokuthi ukuvuma namkha ukuvikeleka kususwe eminyakeni eli-16 ukuya keli-18, abantwanaba abaphakathi kweminyaka eli-16 neli-18, bangatholakali sele bathathwa njengeenlelesi, batholakale sele banamarekhodi, ngombana siyazi ukuthi iinkhathi ziyatjhuguluka. Abantwanaba bahlakanipha msinyazana. Nabatholakala bamlandu, lokho kuzobavimbela ukuthi nasele bafuna ukusebenza, bangakwazi ukusebenza endaweni lapho basebenza khona ngabentwana.
Emaswapheleni, ngifuna ukutjho ukuthi ihlangano ye-ANC edosa phambili begodu ephila njalo, iyawusekela umThethomlingwa lo. (Translation of isiNdebele paragraphs follows.)
[Briefly, I would like to refer to the speech by hon Sheila Camerer about us making the law or making a new South African history in commercialising sex. I would like to say that we are following the decision taken by the court in which the court treats people equally or whereby people and criminals are treated equally in a democratic country, and also without discriminating against women.
We all agree on this issue. But I would like to focus on the speech by hon Steve Swart, that the age of consent be moved from 16 to 18 years. These children between the age of 16 and 18 should not be seen as criminals or as having criminal records because we know that times change. These children develop quicker. They will be prevented from getting jobs in kindergartens if found guilty.
In conclusion, I would like to say the ANC-led government supports this Bill.]
Hon Chairperson Ms Christmas Tree - I thought I had to just put that in. [Laughter.] Hon members, ladies and gentlemen, I like the hat, Chair. I have to be polite at the end. May I just say: Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! At last, this Bill is before Parliament. And I want to say: Hallelujah! Again.
Sing it for us.
No, I can't sing. I think this Bill has taken a very long and torturous, and probably a very necessary consultative route to get where we are. The mere fact that we can today in Parliament, on a rare occasion, have all the parties agree that this Bill should be the one that they will vote on, I think, shows that sometimes, although these processes are painful and torturous, they are probably necessary to get buy-in from people. We should congratulate everyone.
We should start with the political heads that have driven this Bill, the various Ministers, and particularly our present Minister Mabandla. I think we should particularly thank the portfolio committee, both from the majority party - and particularly the chairperson, who is not listening - and also other members and particularly members of the opposition, who I think have always played a very constructive role as far as this Bill is concerned. They also need a big congratulation.
To the SA Law Commission, that has done an enormous amount, but particularly to the various members of the department, Lawrence Bassett, Henk du Preez, Hennie Potgieter and then, of course, the very able Miss Dalene Clark. I really think that we should thank them. They have brought enormous research and enormous talent to bear, to be able to let us pass this Bill. [Applause.]
I want to thank everyone for the very balanced way in which they have even criticised some aspects. No Bill can be perfect. Hopefully in future we will further amend this Bill to make it better; to make sure that it provides even better protection for people. I also thank everyone on that score. All the inputs that you have made, and particularly the report with the resolutions, will be studied carefully, and where we have to come back to Parliament, we will do so.
It would be remiss of me not to talk about the cloud that is hanging over this Bill again. As we walked into this Parliament today, I heard that we are not going to vote on this Bill, because of some technicalities. I do think it is very unfortunate, because the reasons for not doing so, I think, are completely wrong. They are based on wrong legal advice, and unfortunately the legal advice we are receiving in this Parliament just seems to get worse and worse. I have seen, on four different occasions, examples of legal advice given in this Parliament. The kind of information given in these instances, to say the least, is wrong.
It is very serious that Parliament should take this matter forward and make sure that we have the necessary capacity and skills. The legal advice we receive is amateurish and is highly unprofessional. What is worse is that decisions are being based on that kind of information. The department was not asked on any occasion for its advice or what it felt about the issues around why this Bill was not to be voted on today. I think that is just absolutely wrong and it should be rectified.
The issue here is of a mixed Bill that has been raised. This issue is not new in this Parliament. We have debated it for 12 years. We have, over and over, stated that we know the Constitution does not provide for a mixed Bill. It does not provide for a procedure for a mixed Bill. We have dealt with it in the Rules in such a way that we say that when a Bill can be split up into 75 or 76, we will do so. In all the discussions that we have had, we have also acknowledged that there are some Bills that are so intertwined that you cannot split them up as mixed Bills. This is a prime example. When we come to Justice issues, quite a lot of our Bills will be mixed in nature. We have made provision that when you comply with certain requirements in the criminal justice system, then you can get PEP. This is not a PEP policy for the Department of Health, because they don't deal with all issues of PEP. It is a very narrow mechanism that has been created that within the first 72 hours after you have been raped, that if you do comply with certain things in the criminal justice system, then you receive PEP from the Department of Health.
The advice that has been given is that this is a Health matter and should be excised from the Bill and put in a separate Bill. What people fail to see, of course, is that if you put it in a separate Bill, you are going to take all the Justice issues, which are also section 75 issues, to the other Bill. Therefore, the other Bill is not going to be passed because it will not be a section 76 Bill.
We have debated this over and over in Parliament and we have all agreed that the test, when we have done this in the Rules Committee, is the dominant purpose test. The dominant purpose in this case is clearly the criminal justice system. If you comply with certain things in the criminal justice system, then you get PEP. It is very clear that there should be no reason why this Bill should not be processed and why we shouldn't have voted on this Bill.
The consequence of this is that the Bill will now only be voted on next year. The NCOP cannot process the Bill and we now have to wait again for a few months until they have done their hearings. I must say that it is a highly unacceptable process. We now again have to wait for a number of months for this Bill to get on the Statute Book.
I also want to finally say that, if you want to know what this Bill is all about, watch the programme on the History Channel. Last night they had a programme on this absolute maniac, Moses Sithole, the one who was a serial rapist after 1994. Just the things that he did and got away with in the justice system are very scary. This Bill is really a Bill to try to deal with that and try to minimise the damage that the Moses Sitholes have done.
I want to dedicate this Bill to all those South Africans, the majority of South Africans, who treat their partners with decency and respect and do not treat their partners as objects on whom all sexual deprivations can be imposed. To those of you amongst us ...
Chairperson, may I please ask a question?
I will always answer a question from Koos Koek.
Why can't we proceed and vote on the Bill now?
No, there are apparently problems with it. I think I have said my say as far as I did. I wanted to put it on record and I think we have said so. Hopefully, there is still a possibility that Parliament will come back. We have to wait for the NCOP to do their cycle of work and maybe by then all parties can convince Parliament that we should proceed and vote on that occasion.
I really want to dedicate it to all those decent South Africans who do not get decent treatment. Those of you who do feel that you want to get involved in these things, particularly where you are preying on our children, we will deal with you mercilessly and do not expect any sympathy.
May you all have a happy festive season and thank you for supporting the Bill.
Debate concluded.
Chairperson, we move that the Bill be referred back to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development to consult with the Joint Tagging Mechanism in terms of Rule 249(3)(e).
Motion agreed to.
Bill accordingly referred back to the Committee.