Afriforum takes legal action against Ramaphosa over NHI

Afrikaner lobby group AfriForum on Wednesday escalated its opposition to the National Health Insurance (NHI) Act by serving summons on President Cyril Ramaphosa and Health Minister Dr Aaron Motsoaledi. Addressing the media about the civil rights organisation’s latest move, AfriForum’s Head of Public Relations, Ernst van Zyl, said the organisation resolved to take action against Ramaphosa and Motsoaledi to protect the constitutional rights of AfriForum’s members, and those of the public in general. All citizens and Afrikaners in particular have been victims of the ANC’s ideological agenda.

“NHI is another such case. The ANC has already received ample evidence that it will not improve people’s healthcare, but they continue to cling to it for ideological reasons. This is why AfriForum cannot allow this to continue,” he said.

The press briefing was held at the dilapidated Kempton Park Hospital as a visual metaphor for what AfriForum described as the potential collapse of South Africa’s healthcare system should the NHI be implemented in its current form. “The true cost of NHI will be much more than its mere rand value. The loss of, among other things, constitutional rights and patients’ freedom of choice will ultimately result in a much higher price being paid,” concludes Boshoff.pic.twitter.com/bRHqaxSS6o While other entities have already approached the courts to challenge aspects of the Act, AfriForum said its latest move marks the first comprehensive summons directly targeting the law.

[paywall]

AfriForum said it intends to mount a wide-ranging constitutional attack on several of the Act’s provisions and, through this process, create room for expert testimony should factual disputes arise. AfriForum’s legal representative, Wian Spies, said the case is premised on the argument that the NHI Act is inconsistent with the Constitution and should be declared invalid and referred back to Parliament. Among the key objections raised are what AfriForum terms the dilution of provincial governments’ constitutional powers, restrictions on patients’ freedom of choice, limitations on the clinical independence of health practitioners, and the alleged economic unworkability of the NHI framework.

[/paywall]