Aarto traffic law, points demerit system rollout delayed yet again
Reports that the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) Act is being rolled out nationally are false — the driving licence demerit system is not yet in place.
This is according to the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) which said there had been recent fake news and misinformation surrounding Aarto, the government's plan to replace the existing criminal system with an administrative one. With Aarto, drivers will lose points for offences and face suspension or cancellation of their licences if they lose too many, in addition to any fine.
The controversial act, originally passed into law in 1998, has been hit by numerous delays. It was to have commenced in February 2024 but was deferred to a future date which has not been gazetted.
The points demerit system is not operational yet anywhere in the country, including in Johannesburg and Tshwane where Aarto has been piloted for more than a decade, said RTIA spokesperson Monde Mkalipi.
'The points demerit system and rehabilitation programme of traffic infringers are part of phase 3 of the Aarto rollout. Dates for the introduction of the points demerit system are likely to be included in the presidential proclamation which requires to be signed by the president with the date for the commencement of phase 2 and phase 3 of the Aarto national rollout,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Confusion or clarity? Mixed reactions to Gwarube's Bela implementation guidelines
Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube's newly released implementation guidelines on school language and admissions policies under the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act has sparked a wave of mixed responses. While some have cautiously welcomed the move as a tactical step forward, others warn that without formal legal status, the guidelines may create more confusion than clarity within the education sector. Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube's newly released guidelines for implementing the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act aim to assist provincial education departments in navigating two of the act's most contentious issues: school admissions and language policies. The guidelines also address the new legal mandate that extends compulsory education by an additional year to incorporate Grade R, as well as introduce measures for the increased regulation of home schooling. Approved by the Council of Education Ministers, the guidelines have nonetheless met with a mixed response. According to the new guidelines sections 4 and 5 of the act will undergo thorough public consultation before any government directives can be issued. The guidelines state that a school's language policy must prioritise the best interests of learners, while also taking into account available resources, classroom capacity, and what is offered at surrounding schools. Structured process The government will not be able to impose decisions unilaterally — instead, a structured process must be followed before any changes are made to a school's language or admission policies. School governing bodies, parents, relevant associations, and the broader community in which the school operates will all play a role in these decisions. Under the regulations, before a provincial education head can direct a school to adopt more than one language of instruction, they must first ensure that all public participation requirements outlined in the South African Schools Act are met. These include issuing public notice and allowing for a comment period, during which the school, its governing body, parents, and the community can make informed submissions on the proposed change. A public hearing must also be held with reasonable notice, and stakeholders must be given at least 30 days to submit their input. On admissions, the guidelines advise that if a provincial department wishes to force a school to change policy, the department must allow the school governing body an opportunity to dispute and discuss the change. Education expert Mary Metcalfe has welcomed the guidelines, stating that they align with both the act itself and existing national and provincial norms and standards for admissions and language policy. Metcalfe stated that the Bela Bill already made provision for meaningful public participation from school communities and governing bodies, indicating confidence in the law's inclusivity on this front. On the issue of language policy, she said the guidelines were fully consistent with the Bela Bill and should help enable smoother implementation, particularly as provinces began preparations for the 2026 academic year. 'The planning for the 2026 school year will need to ensure that all provinces provide for the admission of all children who turn six in 2026 — Grade R in all schools for all eligible children,' she said. Concerns raised However, other stakeholders have raised significant concerns about the guidelines' practical impact and legal status. Equal Education Law Centre attorney Ebrahiem Daniels and senior researcher Katherine Sutherland said that, in their preliminary view, the guidelines were non-binding — as they themselves acknowledge — and carry little to no legal weight for provincial education departments. They added that the Department of Basic Education had the authority to issue such guidelines, and did so routinely, from exam protocols to hygiene practices in schools. 'These particular guidelines, in our opinion, add little practical value. They largely restate what is already in Bela in more complicated and convoluted language,' they said. Daniels and Sutherland noted that although the Department of Basic Education acknowledged giving 'key stakeholders' only a short window to review the draft guidelines, citing urgency, it remained unclear how those stakeholders were chosen — and no broad public call for comment was made. 'Civil society organisations currently working in education were not consulted and were not alerted, including ourselves and our social movement partner Equal Education. On top of that, we are aware from consultations with others that they were not either,' they said. From their Equal Education Law Centre understanding, the consultation primarily involved representatives from organisations historically opposed to the language and admissions provisions in the Bela Bill. 'Government sources indicate these same groups were involved in drafting the soon to be released draft norms on school capacity. Many of these stakeholders have, in the past, prioritised maintaining small class sizes in well-resourced public schools over broader equity considerations, even when other schools face overcrowding. 'Our concern is that this recent pattern of favouring stakeholders with clear vested interests may influence the upcoming binding regulations on school capacity, which are far more important than non-binding guidelines,' they said. When asked about the potential for the uneven application of the guidelines across provinces or districts, Daniels and Sutherland said the risk was high, given the significant disparities in administrative capacity, financial resources, and political leadership across provinces. They noted that some provinces may interpret the guidelines in line with political priorities, while others may treat them more strictly or disregard them altogether. They also pointed out that differing apartheid legacies could lead to provinces approaching language and admissions policies in fundamentally different ways. Daniels and Sutherland noted that the guidelines came at a time when schools and education departments urgently needed clarity. However, instead of offering clear, practical direction, the guidelines tended to echo Bela's language while introducing new layers of procedural complexity not found in the legislation. 'The length and complexity issue is particularly problematic. A school principal seeking clarity on admission procedures must now navigate pages of detailed factors, cross-references, and procedural requirements that could have been streamlined into clear decision-making frameworks. The guidelines; convoluted approach may actually hinder rather than help implementation,' they said. 'The irony is that in a purported attempt to provide guidance on the interpretation and implementation of Bela, the minister has created a document that may require its own interpretation.' Sadtu labels guidelines unlawful The South African Democratic Teachers' Union (Sadtu) has condemned Gwarube for releasing what it calls 'purported guidelines', describing the move as arrogant and unlawful. In a media statement, Sadtu said the minister lacked the legal authority to issue such guidelines, pointing out that, under the Constitution, only regulations — not guidelines — could be made in terms of Bela. 'We are yet to understand what legal basis and authority these purported guidelines derive from,' the union said, noting that Gwarube herself admitted the guidelines had no binding or lawful effect. The union also accused the minister of deliberately creating confusion and advancing a political agenda aligned with her party, the Democratic Alliance (DA). Sadtu emphasised that it had fully participated in the lawful development of the Bela regulations, which were concluded at the end of March 2025. However, it said it had seen no progress on the formal release of those regulations since then. The union has urged MECs and education department heads not to distribute the guidelines to schools. It has also called on all school governing bodies and its union members serving on them to disregard the minister's document. The National Professional Teachers' Organisation of South Africa (Naptosa) voiced concerns over the limited consultation period and the non-binding nature of the guidelines. While acknowledging the value of stakeholder input, spokesperson Basil Manuel warned that the short review window and lack of legal force risked uneven implementation across provinces — particularly on key issues like compulsory Grade R, language policies, admissions, and school governing bodies' roles. Manuel also flagged concerns about the recommendation that Early Childhood Development (ECD) centres provide Grade R and register as independent schools. He noted that many under-resourced centres may struggle to comply without significant provincial support, infrastructure investment, and capacity building. Manuel also reaffirmed Naptosa's commitment to advocating for fair, legally sound policies that guaranteed quality public education for all learners. DM
Daily Maverick
2 days ago
- Daily Maverick
Can a new leader elevate the Hawks, help SA mount a more effective response to serious crime?
To effectively tackle serious crime, South Africa's Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation requires a strong leadership team. The process to appoint a new head of the Hawks – officially South Africa's Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation – is under way. This key criminal justice appointment should receive broad public attention. Lieutenant-General Godfrey Lebeya, who headed the Hawks from 2018, retired on 30 May. The Hawks' deputy head, Lieutenant-General Siphesihle Nkosi, is currently the acting head. Under the South African Police Service (SAPS) Act, the appointment is made by Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, with concurrence by the Cabinet. It is not clear how long the new appointment process will take. In early June, Mchunu withdrew the initial advertisement, indicating that the time frame for applications would be extended to find the best possible candidate. Against the backdrop of high levels of serious crime in South Africa, what are the prospects for this specialised unit? Could a new head help the country mount a more effective response to serious crime? A high-performing Hawks unit is crucial to tackling organised crime, financial crime and corruption, which are the focus of its mandate. Most of these crimes have cyber-forensic elements, and some have complex international dimensions. The global intergovernmental body, the Financial Action Task Force, requires South Africa to prove its ability to prosecute money laundering, illicit financial flows and terror financing. The Hawks must provide specialised investigation services to get these cases to court. During his time as Hawks head, Lebeya reported publicly each quarter on the directorate's successes. For the January to March 2025 period, he indicated that the unit had made arrests for various crimes, seized firearms, shut down drug laboratories and secured convictions against 239 persons. While there have been achievements, external observers have highlighted the Hawks' shortcomings, including a lack of skills. These hinder its ability to conduct complex investigations such as the 'proactive identification' of money laundering networks. The unit has never received sufficient budget funding to reduce its vacancy rate below 50%. Last week, Ian Cameron, chair of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Police, lamented how long it was taking for the Hawks to complete an investigation into corruption at the SAPS training centre in Philippi, Cape Town. When Mchunu announced the extension of the Hawks head application period, Cameron emphasised the need to make the 'right appointment'. Lebeya may have wanted to turn things around. But like his National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) colleague Shamila Batohi, he has had little room for manoeuvre. Turning criminal justice organisations around requires more than simply appointing good heads. A programme of strategic institutional strengthening must be directed by a skilled executive team that has political backing and financial support. The Hawks' history is intertwined with State Capture. Its predecessor, the Directorate for Special Operations, or Scorpions, was closed in 2009 by supporters of former president Jacob Zuma as a way to neutralise its investigations against Zuma and others. Following the Hawks' establishment, Zuma used his power over senior appointments to manipulate and undermine the unit and other criminal justice agencies. Following legal challenges, the Constitutional Court ruled in 2011 and again in 2014 that the state was obligated to establish an effective independent anti-corruption agency. The judgments said the Hawks should perform this role and that legislation must be amended to strengthen its independence. Notwithstanding these rulings, the process and criteria for senior leadership appointments remain challenging throughout the criminal justice system – including for the SAPS, NPA, Independent Police Investigative Directorate and the Hawks. While constitutional provisions entrench executive influence over certain senior criminal justice appointments, the extent to which this can be used to weaken such agencies must be curtailed. A key requirement is that independent professional panels run merit-based, competitive and transparent selection processes, and make recommendations. Rather than considering how to strengthen the Hawks, debate in Parliament and elsewhere has focused on setting up alternative structures to investigate corruption. At this point, it's unclear what responsibility the Hawks would retain in this regard. Either way, there is more than enough for the specialised unit to work on. South Africa must establish strategic centres for fighting organised and financial crime. Priority must be given to taking down networks that support the use of assassinations, particularly the killing of whistle-blowers, political leaders and community activists. The country also needs answers on where illegal guns are coming from and how to stop the supply. The new Hawks head should boost staff confidence by leading vigorous and independent investigations of priority crimes that demonstrate the unit's vital role in South Africa. This will require a strategic leadership team to galvanise public support and build the Hawks' capacity to work on complex crimes. The team should establish the Hawks as an employer of choice and a highly skilled law enforcement agency. The new head should also contribute to the overall strategic leadership of South Africa's multi-agency system for investigating organised crime, financial crime and corruption. This should include advocating for a crime intelligence and analysis apparatus aligned with the realities of crime in the 21st century. DM
The Citizen
4 days ago
- The Citizen
Concerns over Mantashe's changes to draft mineral resources bill
Mantashe's changes to mining legislation have provoked backlash for favouring the industry over public interest. Minerals and Petroleum Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe was lashed for omitting a requirement for Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) participation in applications for prospecting rights. Mantashe recently gazetted two corrections to the Draft Mineral Resources Development Bill and also nullified a provision for ministerial approval for change of control in listed companies that own mining rights. Mining expert David van Wyk asked why the minister backed down. Environmental concerns 'The prospecting companies make huge profits after prospecting reports are out. They sell the prospecting reports to the highest bidder. 'We have a serious problem with the change of control in listed companies. It is what ultimately allows mining companies to walk away from their environmental responsibilities and their responsibility to close and rehabilitate mines,' said Van Wyk. 'This is why we have more than 6 000 abandoned mines. When control of companies changes and the minister, as the custodian of the minerals which, according to the Act, belongs to the public, is not informed of these changes, he is unable to assign responsibility to the owners as he will not know who they are.' ALSO READ: 'Is it greed or jealousy?': Ramaphosa fires back at critics of BEE, Transformation Fund Call for state-led mining and revenue transparency The solution to the problems of environmental and social responsibility, as well as mine closure and rehabilitation, was to establish public ownership not just of the minerals in the ground, but also of the mining process and the extracted minerals, with the state as the custodian and the revenue accruing in a sovereign fund, Van Wyk said. South Africa does have a stateowned mining company and a sovereign fund, but the share of that company in the overall mining sector is minimal. There was no account of how much money has accrued in the sovereign fund since its inception, Van Wyk said. Christopher Rutledge, director at the Mining Affected Communities in Action, said the organisation was concerned. 'Pressure of elite interests' 'Following a mere signal of dissatisfaction from the mining sector, Mantashe swiftly amended the draft of the Bill, specifically the removal of the requirement for B-BBEE participation in prospecting rights and the omission of provisions for ministerial oversight of changes in control of listed companies holding rights. 'As we have previously warned, the main purpose of the Amendment Bill represents a further retreat from the constitutional mandate of transformation, accountability and justice for mining-affected communities. 'Rather than correcting the draft Bill, the minister has capitulated even further to the pressure of elite interests, in particular the Minerals Council South Africa, confirming the extent to which the state has aligned itself with industry over people.' Rutledge said the removal of BEE from the prospecting regime was not a technical correction, but a political decision to sell-out transformation. ALSO READ: Starlink proposal: Mashatile says Cabinet holds final say on policy changes Prospecting was the gateway to mining and excluding it from transformation requirements ensures the ownership and control of mineral resources remains concentrated in the hands of historical beneficiaries of apartheid-era privilege, he said. 'This opens the door to unchecked mergers, takeovers and asset stripping with no regard for affected communities, workers, or environmental responsibilities. We reject the illusion that deregulation is a form of reform,' Rutledge said. Industry engagements Union federation Cosatu spokesperson Mathews Parks said it was critical that legislation is in sync with B-BBEE to avoid contradictions. 'Cosatu will engage with the minister to get a better understanding of the objectives of the amendments.' Minerals Council South Africa Allan Seccombe said the organisation would continue to review the Bill and submit its perspectives by 13 August. 'The Bill in its current form does not encourage or sustain the growth and investment that the mining industry needs.' NOW READ: Cosatu says debate on B-BBEE is needed for beneciaries' benefit
