How deep the irony that as Trump attempted a crass humiliation of South Africa’s president over the property rights of white farmers, our highest court was carefully deliberating Ramaphosa’s concerns about arbitrary deprivation of property.

Last week, as US President Donald Trump was accusing President Cyril Ramaphosa of not respecting white farmers’ property rights, South Africa’s highest court was — at the president’s request — holding a high-level debate on intellectual property rights and the constitutionality of the Copyright Amendment Bill.

It was democracy and the rule of law at work, a demonstration of care over rights and property issues.

This is one of a handful of times a president of democratic South Africa has exercised the constitutional authority to refer bills passed by Parliament to the Constitutional Court for review.

Ramaphosa first referred the bill back to Parliament in 2020, citing its potential conflict with the Constitution and international treaties and its potential for retroactive arbitrary deprivation of property, among other issues.

Parliament sent the bill back to the president’s desk with significant changes in 2022, but Ramaphosa still referred it in 2024 to the country’s highest court because he remained concerned about the bill’s constitutionality.

The genesis of the bill dates back more than a decade. Implicated are a variety of stakeholders and multiple considerations. What has to be balanced are the interests of authors and creators of copyright work against South Africa’s developmental needs, specifically as they relate to education and general access to information and knowledge.

Read the full article on the Daily Maverick