Page 20
LSSA NEWS
The board of the Attorneys Development
Fund (ADF) has
adopted revised application
criteria in order to streamline
the process for those attorneys' firms
in need of business support.
The ADF was established in 2011 as
a joint venture between the Attorneys
Fidelity Fund, the Law Society of South
Africa (LSSA) and its six constituent
members. Its main aim is to provide
business support loans to newly established
and deserving attorneys' firms
in the form of infrastructure and mentorship.
The following application criteria for
attorneys' firms apply with immediate
effect.
An applicant must -
be an admitted attorney;
be in need of growth, which includes
growth in a new area or branch of
emerging law;
be in a position to conduct a sustainable
practice with the business support;
be willing to be monitored continually;
be in need of infrastructural technology;
be in need of infrastructural resources
and equipment;
recognise and accept his responsibility
to repay the loan;
Attorneys Development Fund: Revised application
criteria for business support loans
have the capacity to become an efficient
and proficient attorney;
have the capacity to learn how to establish
and run a successful business;
provide a business plan, marketing
plan and cash flow statement;
be willing to be mentored and trained
further;
be within acceptable margins as a
business risk - applicants with negative
records with credit bureaus are
considered a risk to the ADF;
be without his own funds/assets to
finance his new practice operational
needs;
have either registered, been exempted
from, or undertaken to enrol for the
mandatory practice management training
course; and
be in good standing with his statutory,
provincial law society.
The ADF may request additional information
and/or details about any information
provided.
The ADF has sourced various reputable
suppliers to provide infrastructural
technology, resources and equipment.
The ADF pays these suppliers direct for
the required infrastructure. Therefore,
DE REBUS - OCTOBER 2012
- 18 -
the attorneys' firm receives the infrastructure
and does not receive any
cash. Note that no direct cash requests
will be considered.
The infrastructure to be allocated to
each attorneys' firm depends on the
firm's needs and could include computers/laptops,
internet connectivity,
accounting software, printers, desks
and chairs. The cost of the infrastructure,
including an interest rate of prime
minus three, is repayable by the attorneys'
firm over a maximum period of
three years. No interest is levied where
the recipient repays the loan within the
first 12 months.
Interested applicants should consult
the ADF website on www.adf.za.net for
further information and application
forms.
Applications are considered by the
ADF on a quarterly basis.
Anthony Pillay, finance director,
Law Society of South Africa,
tony@LSSA.org.za
LSSA says Traditional Courts Bill infringes on constitutional rights
In its comments to parliament on the
Traditional Courts Bill (B1 of 2012)
last month, the Law Society of South
Africa (LSSA) focused on highlighting
areas where the constitutionality
of the Bill might be challenged.
The aim of the Bill is: 'To affirm the recognition
of the traditional justice system
and its values, based on restorative justice
and reconciliation; to provide for the
structure and functioning of traditional
courts in line with constitutional imperatives
and values [and] to enhance customary
law.'
Women comprise approximately 60%
of traditional communities. The LSSA
was concerned that the Bill as it stood
would not protect the dignity of women.
The LSSA noted that the protection and
recognition of women's rights would be
undermined by the Bill, as customary law
is firmly rooted in a patriarchal system.
Traditional courts are comprised almost
exclusively of older men and, in many
places, women are not allowed to attend
traditional courts as they may not enter
sacred places. In other cases women are
either not permitted to represent themselves
or they must be represented by a
male family member - and sometimes
that male family member is the same person
infringing on their rights or threatening
their security.
The LSSA said: 'In the past, women were
considered perpetual minors and were
not empowered to participate in decisionmaking
processes. The gains that have
been made during the past years towards
the empowerment of women and gender
equality are being reversed. It is essential
that women are included and allowed
to participate in the development of customary
law, so that their own needs, and
those of their children, are taken into account.
Should this Bill be enacted, many
women in rural areas, where development
is happening at a very slow pace, will find
themselves having to struggle against the
twin threats of both poverty and oppression
from their male counterparts.'
The LSSA pointed out that, whereas in
the Bill the traditional courts are given
the power to deal with cases of a civil
and criminal nature, there are, however,
no checks and balances on the powers
granted to traditional chiefs, nor is the
separation of powers evident. 'Unilateral
power is given to traditional chiefs who,
in the execution of their duties, will act
as legislators, administrators and judicial
officers of customary law. This creates
a potential for rural despots to reign supreme,'
said the LSSA.
The fact that the Bill does not allow
for legal representation, even in respect
of criminal cases, infringes on the right
to such representation and the constitutional
right to a fair trial, particularly for
uneducated, marginalised and indigent
persons.
The LSSA also noted that -
an order of the traditional court is final
and there is no provision for an internal
appeal system;
no provision is made for the keeping of
mechanical records of the entire proceedings,
making appeal and review proceedings
before the magistrate's court difficult;
cases may be transferred from the traditional
court to the magistrate's court or
small claims court at the discretion of the
presiding officer; however, the parties do
not have the right to choose to have their
matters heard in a 'mainstream' court as
there is no clause to opt out of this system;
and
careful consideration should be given to
the training model for traditional leaders,
since experience has shown that teaching
by way of a manual, delivering a lecture
and evaluation by way of questions and
answers is not always appropriate. Material
should be created that, as far as possible,
resembles 'real-life' situations.
The LSSA indicated that the Bill sought
to dignify customary law and place it on
a proper footing. However, in practice it
has the effect of recreating aspects of the
system of apartheid, as it uses the same
approach as the tribal authorities legislation
of the 1950s. It inadvertently leads to
imposing 'apartheid boundaries' on communities,
yet again reversing the gains
that have been made since 1994.
The LSSA concluded that people living
in rural areas appear to appreciate
settling disputes without straining relations,
but a different vehicle - and not
that envisaged in the Traditional Courts
Bill, which has traditional courts presided
over by traditional leaders - must be used
to address this gap.
The full comments by the LSSA can be
accessed on the LSSA website www.LSSA.
org.za under 'Legal practitioners: LSSA
comments'.
q