Chairperson, the Western Cape Province holds the view that while the constitutional invalidity is addressed on a technical level. The Bill fails to ensure that wives in polygamous marriages will be able to exercise the rights afforded to them in practice. The Bill fails to define marital property, house property and family property, therefore creating a loophole through which traditional leaders and husbands in polygamous marriages may determine property that rightfully should fall within these categories. To be designated to fall within the sole control of a husband and so called personal property.

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the ANC did not want to accept propose definitions of these terms during public and committee hearings in both Houses, on the basis that it might lead to unintended consequences, examples of which could not be applied.

We are of the view that to support of this Bill will mean to fail women living according customary practices and who are still subjected to patriarchy and the refusal of their basic rights. The Western Cape, therefore cannot support this Bill. Thank you.

Debate concluded.

Declaration of vote made on behalf of the Western Cape.

Question put: That the Bill be adopted.

IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu- Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West.

AGAINST: Western Cape.

Bill accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution