1. PERFORMING ANIMALS PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL (B9-2015): AN UPDATE
BRIEFING BY THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE , FORESTRY AND FISHERIES
11 August 2015

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE Acronyms Background
Resolution pertaining to the request for extension from the Constitutional Court
Outcomes from the Constitutional Court
Conditions of extension
Conclusions

3. ACRONYMS DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries NA
National Assembly
NCOP
National Council of Provinces
NSPCA
National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
PAPA
Performing Animals Protection Act PC
Portfolio Committee

4. BACKGROUND
On the 11th of July 2013, the Constitutional Court of South Africa declared Sections 2 and 3 of the PAPA to be unconstitutional.
The order of constitutional invalidity of the impugned sections was suspended for 18 months (alternatively by the 10th of January 2015) so that the Parliament can cure the defect in legislation.
0n the 27th of November 2014, the Constitutional Court granted an extension for remedial actions to the 12th of July 2015 at the request of the Department.
The Cabinet approved the Amendment Bill on the 10th of December 2014.
The Parliament started processing the Amendment Bill in March 2015.

5. BACKGROUND
During the processing of the Bill, and after the public hearings, it became apparent that consequential amendments of certain Sections of the principal Act were required additionally to those initially proposed by the Executive. These additional consequential amendments included Sections 4, 5 and 7 of the Principal Act.
On the 5th of June 2015, the Portfolio Committee (PC) on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries deliberated on the aforementioned consequences and the implications for the deadline of the 12th of July 2015.
A resolution was taken by the PC to approach the Constitutional Court to request for an extension of 12 months, from the current deadline of the 12th of July 2015.

6. BACKGROUND
DAFF filed an urgent application to the Constitutional Court for the extension. The basis of the affidavit filed by DAFF was centered around the fact the additional amendments require the PC, according to Rule NA249 (3b), to obtain permission from the National Assembly (NA) to amend other provisions or existing legislation other than those which the Executive had initially sought to amend.
The time frame with regard to these amendments is dependent upon whether the report is placed on the order paper and deliberated by the NA and the date that a resolution is taken by the Assembly.

7. REQUEST BY DAFF FOR A FURTHER EXTENSION
The National Council of Provinces (NCOP) must also process the Bill in terms of Section 75 of the Constitution and the relevant NCOP Rules.
With cognisance of the abovementioned, on the 10th of July 2015 the Constitutional Court concluded that a short extension shall be granted, pending a determination of the request by the Minister
In this regard, the order made on the 27th of November 2014 has been varied by further extending the suspension of the declaration of constitutional invalidity of the impugned sections in the case of NSPCA v/s DAFF
The Constitutional Court granted a short extension to the 28th of August 2015 instead of the 12 months requested in the founding affidavit.

8. RESPONSE FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
The view of the Constitutional Court was that it is in the interest of justice that, a written submission of not more than 20 pages may be written by both parties. An order was issued as follows:
The NSPCA was directed to file an opposing affidavit, if it so wishes, on or before the 17th of July 2015;
The Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries must file a responding written argument on or before 24th July 2015; and
The Constitutional Court ordered that the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA) must then further file responding affidavit by 31 July 2015.

9. RESPONSE FROM THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
On the 13th of July 2013 the Department received communication form the NSPCA that the party will not be filing Heads of Argument in the matter, but will be leaving the matter in the hands of the Court.
Consequentially, by implications this means that DAFF will also not be filing any responding affidavits.
This then leaves the decision to the Constitutional Court regarding further long-term extension.
In view of the above, DAFF will now await for further feedback from the Constitutional Court.

10. THANK YOU