In a pivotal legal ruling, the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has allowed Social Development Minister Sisisi Tolashe to appeal a decision that declared the 2023 regulations of the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) unconstitutional.
This ruling has major implications for the administration of social grants, particularly the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant, which supports millions of vulnerable South Africans.
Table of Contents
Background of the High Court Judgment
Earlier in 2025, the Gauteng High Court ruled that certain SASSA regulations restricted access to the R370 SRD grant. The court invalidated several key provisions, including:
- Online-Only Applications: The requirement to apply exclusively through electronic platforms was deemed unconstitutional, as it disadvantaged individuals without internet access or digital skills.
- Definitions of “Income” and “Financial Support”: The court found these definitions too rigid, excluding many applicants who were in genuine financial need.
Advocacy Groups’ Legal Challenge
The 2023 regulations were challenged by advocacy groups #PayTheGrants and the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ).
They argued that the regulations imposed unreasonable barriers to accessing essential financial aid, thereby violating the constitutional right to social security.
Court’s Justification for Granting the Appeal
Judge Mpostoli Twala granted leave to appeal, emphasizing the complexity and significance of the case, which affects nearly 30% of South Africa’s population.
While the judge stood by his original decision, he acknowledged that the matter required further review by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) due to its widespread societal impact.
Implications of the Appeal
The appeal will focus on several critical aspects of the SRD grant regulations, including:
- Application Procedures: Assessing whether mandatory online applications unfairly exclude those without digital access.
- Eligibility Criteria: Reevaluating restrictive definitions of “income” and “financial support” to ensure fairer access to grants.
- Payment Delays: Addressing systemic issues causing delayed or missed payments, which the High Court previously ruled unconstitutional.
Key 2023 SASSA Regulations Under Scrutiny
| Regulation Aspect | Court’s Finding |
|---|---|
| Online-Only Applications | Deemed unconstitutional due to accessibility issues. |
| Definitions of “Income” and “Financial Support” | Found to be too restrictive, excluding many in need. |
| Bank Verification Process | Criticized for inaccuracies that led to unfair exclusions. |
| Payment Subject to Available Funds | Ruled unconstitutional; funds cannot be withheld due to budget shortfalls. |
| Appeals Process Restrictions | Limiting new evidence in appeals was deemed unfair. |
The Supreme Court of Appeal will now review the case, considering arguments from both the government and advocacy groups.
The outcome will significantly impact the future of social grants and financial aid accessibility for South Africa’s vulnerable populations.
FAQs
Why did the High Court declare the 2023 SASSA regulations unconstitutional?
The court found that requirements like online-only applications and restrictive definitions of “income” unfairly limited access to the SRD grant, violating constitutional rights.
What does the Minister of Social Development’s appeal aim to achieve?
The appeal seeks to overturn the High Court’s decision, either reinstating the regulations or modifying them in line with legal and constitutional standards.
How could this legal process impact SRD grant applicants?
The appeal’s outcome may lead to changes in how grants are applied for, who qualifies, and how payments are processed, potentially making access to financial aid either easier or more difficult.
