Participatory Democracy | The Doctors for Life Case

Over objections that had been made by Doctor's for Life (DFL), the National Assembly of Parliament adopted an amendment to the health law allowing senior nurses to perform terminations of pregnancies under controlled conditions. DFL had asked for a hearing when the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) would be dealing with the matter. The NCOP told them that they needn't come to Cape Town, as the NCOP would be visiting the provinces to consult with the people there on the proposed amendment as well as on a law that would for the first time provide recognition for traditional healers. Sometime later, DFL learnt that the amendment and the law regarding traditional healers had both been adopted by the NCOP and signed into law by the President. DFL applied to the Constitutional Court to have the amendment, and the statute on traditional healers, declared invalid because they violated the constitutional requirement for the Legislature to take reasonable steps to involve the public in the adoption of legislation. Their challenge was upheld by the Court in a judgment by Justice Ngcobo which dealt extensively with the importance of participatory democracy as a means of re-enforcing representative democracy. In a separate concurring judgment, Justice Sachs underlined the importance to democracy of enabling the voices to be heard of groups in society that might not be well-represented in the influential political structures in Parliament.