The law is not neutral — it serves power or it serves the people
The recent court challenge by corporate law firms against the Legal Sector Code is more than a legal dispute, it represents a profound political and institutional crisis. It calls on all members of the legal fraternity, across every sector, to respond with clarity, conviction and courage. The law does not exist in a vacuum, untouched by our country's history, and neither should we.
At the core of this legal challenge is a disturbing message that the inclusion of black people in key parts of the legal sector is bad for business. The use of law to defend elite power is nothing new — it has long been a tool for preserving exclusion in South Africa. From the legal justifications of apartheid to post-apartheid tactics of delay and obstruction, the legal profession has often stood guard over the gates of privilege. It is therefore unsurprising — though no less alarming — that this claim is now being made under oath, in a country where the majority is black.
If this moment does not compel us to speak out, then perhaps we are complicit in the unequal future being forged in our name. As in every contested space, power does not yield without a contestation — it fortifies itself.
The government's black economic empowerment code for the legal sector reveals that, three decades into democracy, these corporate law firms have not been able to self-regulate in a way that meaningfully includes black professionals at the highest levels. These same firms are adept at identifying black talent on university campuses, sitting on transformation committees, publishing polished equity reports and championing mentorship initiatives.
Yet, when real accountability is required and they are asked to disrupt entrenched patterns of opportunity, democratise access to work for smaller firms or transparently report on transformation progress, they recoil, and compliance is then framed as a threat to their freedom to trade. This is not a principled stand; it is a calculated defence of privilege. It exposes a profession more committed to the appearance of transformation than to its substance.
While these corporate law firms tie transformation in red tape and legal technicalities, we must remember that the Constitution is not neutral. It is a charter for total social transformation and it commits South Africa to a future rooted in social justice, human dignity, equality and freedom for all. It rejects all forms of racism and sexism and it demands that we all play a role in building an inclusive society.
We must abandon the romantic notion that the Constitution will do the work on its own. As a transformative charter, it demands action — not from some anonymous public, but from the very institutions and professions that now invoke it to escape accountability. Section 22 of the Constitution protects the right to choose one's profession and it was never meant to entrench monopoly power. Yet, in the hands of some corporate firms, it is being used to stall transformation and delegitimise a fair redistribution of opportunity.
When a fraternity sees the very Constitution born of struggle being used to shield privilege, the bitter irony must not go uncontested because corporate law firms are not exempt from confronting the dissonance between constitutional ideals and the lived realities of South African society. The rule of law must never be weaponised to preserve an unjust social order. If these firms truly valued legal integrity and constitutional governance, they would have embraced transformation long ago. They've had more than 30 years and have consistently chosen not to. Similarly, had they attended to meaningful transformation, government intervention would not be necessary.
Similarly, Kathleen Dlepu, former chairperson of the Legal Practice Council, asked: 'What if the voices of resistance to the Legal Sector Code aren't just coming from the usual suspects? What if, behind the legal jargon and procedural masks, we find the fingerprints of those who once pledged allegiance to transformation, not as outsiders, but from within?'
Her words force uncomfortable questions: Who signed these court papers? Which senior counsel is willing to lend their name to this gatekeeping? Which junior counsel, allegedly the future, is being showcased as window dressing while undermining black advancement? These questions matter because law is never neutral. It either serves power or it serves the people and the South African story requires that the law is used for the good of the people.
The entire legal fraternity bears a social responsibility to take a clear and public stance on what is unfolding. The disproportionate stranglehold on transformation maintained by firms that built their power during the darkest chapters of this country's history must be called into question. We cannot look to institutions that profited from the systemic exclusion of black people to lead us into a just future especially when their messages, no matter who delivers them, ultimately undermine the legitimacy of black practitioners. Transformation is not a favour; it is a constitutional imperative that rests on all stakeholders.
This is a moment for clarity — not compromise. The legal profession cannot continue to obscure its failings behind rhetoric. It cannot claim nobility while actively defending structural exclusion and those of us who believe in the Constitution's vision must be willing to call this out for what it is — a crisis of legitimacy. Beneath the veneer of constitutional argument lies a longstanding truth — the powers that control corporate law in South Africa hold the view that transformation in the legal profession is, and has always been, treated as optional. Similarly, this is a moment to acknowledge that entry into elite corporate law circles has often required silence about the racial inequalities that continue to shape our profession.
People died for this democracy. Scores of people willingly and unwillingly gave up their singular human experiences in the name of the idea that, one day, this country would not require the well-being and prosperity of black people as a sacrifice for a firm to remain in business. We cannot let those sacrifices happen in vain.
Bwanika Lwanga is a corporate and commercial attorney and a columnist with an interest in African regional trade, spatial justice and social justice issues.
Abongile Nkamisa is a lawyer and legal researcher interested in corporate accountability, access to information and law to advance social justice.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
3 hours ago
- The South African
How rich are South Africa's 7 billionaires this week?
It's comparatively 'easy' to make money – when you have money to start with. Compound interest is indeed the eighth wonder of the world! As they say, the rich get richer, while the poor stay, well, poor. Money makes money – and these seven South African men have made a lot of it over the years. And by a lot, we mean a LOT ! According to Forbes' real-time tracking of billionaires, Johann Rupert and his family are the richest in South Africa, with a net worth of $13.7 billion. The Ruperts are followed by diamond magnate Nicky Oppenheimer, who boasts a net worth of $10.4 billion. They are followed by Koos Bekker, Patrice Motsepe, Michiel Le Roux, Jannie Mouton and Christo Wiese. South Africa's seven dollar billionaires all made their money in different ways – from luxury goods, diamonds, mining, media, banking and retail. Last week, Rupert was the big 'loser' as his net worth dropped by $300 million (R5.4 billion). Oppenheimer, Motsepe, Mouton and Wiese all lost $100 million (R1.8 billion) to their net worths. Cumulatively, South Africa's seven dollar billionaires are worth $36.7 billion (R663 billion). Meanwhile, in terms of the overall world list, South Africa-born Elon Musk remains the world's richest person with a reported $409 billion. Below, the list of the top seven richest South Africans in the world as of 23 June 2025. Rank Name Last week This week Source 183 Johann Rupert & family $14bn $13.7bn Luxury goods 271 Nicky Oppenheimer & family $10.5bn $10.4bn Diamonds 1 049 Koos Bekker $3.6bn $3.6bn Media, investments 1 174 Patrice Motsepe $3.3bn $3.2bn Mining 1 506 Michiel Le Roux $2.5bn $2.5bn Banking 2 056 Jannie Mouton & family $1.8bn $1.7bn Retail 2 149 Christo Wiese $1.7bn $1.6bn Financial services TOTAL $37.4bn $36.7bn Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
The Herald
5 hours ago
- The Herald
Is SA ready to meet the new tech challenges?
Every day presents us with the reality that the fantastical future of our childhoods, a future in which cars drove themselves and machines could think, is here. That future, characterised by rapid advances in technology and artificial intelligence (AI), is complex, challenging and holds many opportunities — and even more perils. Can SA negotiate it successfully? As we debate just how many people are unemployed in the country, are we even considering that a significant number of jobs will be obliterated by technological advances and AI — and what that means for SA? There will of course be many new jobs created by these advances — are we prepared to exploit those opportunities? Are our education systems already preparing such a workforce? We are not alone, of course. The global bank Goldman Sachs has said about 300-million jobs globally could be affected by generative AI, the consultancy McKinsey has said between 400- and 800-million people could lose their jobs to AI by 2030, while the International Monetary Fund says nearly 40% of global employment is exposed to AI. The future is here. My thoughts turned to these issues as I visited Los Angeles in the US last week. Some of the most dramatic pictures to come out of the recent riots in that city were of protesters, or agents provocateurs, setting 'autonomous' or driverless taxis on fire. In one attention-grabbing picture, a masked 'protester' is standing on top of one such car, vandalising it with a skateboard, while another car is engulfed by flames behind him. Waymo, the company which runs the driverless taxi service, temporarily suspended service due to the vandalism, but it is not deterred. It is reportedly 'aggressively expanding into new US markets'. It already provides more than 250,000 paid trips each week in Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Austin, Texas. It is preparing to bring fully autonomous rides to Atlanta, Miami, and Washington, DC next year. It has applied for permission to operate in New York City 'autonomously with a trained specialist' [driver] as the first step towards breaking into the largest U S city as a fully driverless service. For many of us, the idea of a driverless ride-hailing service (essentially Uber or Bolt without a driver) in SA seems like a distant joke. Forget about the driving itself. What about the potential for crimes such as the hijacking and kidnapping of passengers and vandalism? These impediments are short-term. At some point, passengers (and women in particular) scared about an immediate crime (being harassed or even assaulted by a ride hailing driver — sadly, frequent offences in SA) will opt for a service such as this one. Stats SA has suggested there are about 250,000 minibus taxi drivers in the country. What is their future? We are a country which relies heavily on people. For example, there are some 140,000 people employed at petrol stations across the country, many of them as petrol attendants. This is an SA luxury which many countries don't enjoy — you dispense petrol for yourself. These jobs will however not be in danger from AI or South Africans suddenly realising they can service themselves. Most petrol attendants may lose their jobs because of another technical innovation: the world is moving very swiftly towards electric vehicles . It may take years, but it's coming. SA faces an unemployment tsunami. We talk about unemployment so much on these pages and yet nothing really happens except when the minister of higher education appoints her comrades to the boards of sector education and training authorities to loot the funds which are supposed to educate young people for this uncertain future. One of the few leaders who seem to be thinking about the impact of these developments on our society is former finance minister and businessman Trevor Manuel. I have to say, the more our country matures the more I am convinced we missed a huge opportunity in not elevating him to the presidency very soon after Thabo Mbeki departed the stage in 2008. We are the poorer for it. Speaking at Glendale High School in Rocklands, Cape Town, last week, Manuel said he believed today's youth were not being equipped for a radically changing world. 'People talk about artificial intelligence, and in areas like Mitchells Plain and Philippi, we sit around and say: 'What is that?'' he said. 'And if we do not transform the education system, we are going to leave behind this generation and the next generation. 'It's not the fault of the young people, it's the fault of those of us who understand there is a different world, and we don't actually make adequate investments in time, energy and resources.' The future is here. The challenge is to ensure that in five and 10 years we do not look back at this period with the regret we have about the past 10 or 15 'lost' years.
The Herald
5 hours ago
- The Herald
Do your homework before investing your hard-earned money
Once again, hundreds of people have lost money they can ill afford to lose investing in what appeared to be a legitimate financial enterprise. All of them have now been left out of pocket, with some in dire financial straits as a result. The company's office in Greenacres is closed and its website is no longer accessible. The person running the operation also seems to be ducking and diving attempts from the complainants, as well as this newspaper, to obtain an explanation for what is looking more and more like a scam. Police are investigating after receiving numerous complaints. Unfortunately, trusting people have again allegedly been duped into putting money into an operation promising regular high returns and being left with nothing in the end. The real heartbreak, though, is that many investors either took out bank loans or used their pension payouts or life savings for the investments on the premise of quick returns. They have been left in a terrible position — no pension to sustain them, no nest egg for the future, bank loans to repay. There are more than 300 complainants on one WhatsApp group. The stories are heartrending. One man is going through a divorce he says is because of the money he lost, another investor has to beg for milk and bread from neighbours just to get by. A third is battling depression. Most complainants are from the Eastern Cape — Gqeberha mainly — with a few from Cape Town and Durban. Though the company, which started operating in 2024, did initially make some payouts, they seem to have stopped at the beginning of the year. Is it a scam? Only time will tell. If it was not a deliberate ploy to fleece the unsuspecting, the person who ran the scheme should come forward and explain what went wrong instead of going to ground and avoiding calls. We implore would-be investors in any financial enterprise, do your homework before parting with your money. Whatever claims are made on the website or in promotional material, check them thoroughly to test their veracity. The Herald
