The toyi-toyi will never be the same
A landmark Constitutional Court ruling that could hold all unions liable for damages caused during strikes has been met with mixed reactions.
The Constitutional Court yesterday upheld a high court judgment that the SA Transport and Allied Workers' Union was liable for damages caused during a strike in Cape Town in 2006.
The court ruled that the law aimed to afford victims recourse where a gathering becomes destructive and results in injury, loss of property or life.
In upholding the judgment, Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng said: "The organisations are intimately involved in the planning, supervision and execution of the gathering, but the potential victims are not . it is thus not unreasonable to allow the victim of riot damage to claim all compensation from the organisers of a gathering and then leave it to the organisers to seek recourse."
During the 2006 strike, shops were looted and several cars were damaged by people involved in the protest.
Satawu general secretary Zenzo Mahlangu said yesterday's ruling was a "disaster" as it set a precedent for organisers of Satawu and other unions to be held liable for damage caused during strikes.
"We still need to be advised by our lawyers as to what we can do," he said.
While Satawu tried to be rational about the matter, it believed "certain clauses" of the constitution needed to be rewritten, Mahlangu said.
Yesterday's ruling meant Satawu would have to cough up just over R500000, but Mahlangu said its main concern was that the ruling would restrict workers' right to go on strike.
The DA saw the ruling as a "massive victory".
The party's spokesman on transport, Ian Ollis, has for more than two years advocated that parliament adopt a "private members bill", legislation that would hold unions responsible for riot damage caused during strikes, marches and pickets.
Ollis said yesterday: "For too long Cosatu and its affiliates have been allowed to engage in violent and chaotic strikes without any repercussions. This ruling sets a precedent that will force them to keep better discipline at marches, pickets and strikes."
Sizwe Pamla, spokesman for health workers' union Nehawu, said yesterday's judgment failed to realise that people who caused damage during strikes were not always union members.
The deputy general secretary of education union Sadtu, Nkosana Dolopi, said the judgment set a detrimental precedent.
Cosatu spokesman Patrick Craven said last night: "We regret the decision and we will be engaging the government to see how the law can be changed to protect the right of workers to strike."


SHARE YOUR OPINION
If you have an opinion you would like to share on this article, please send us an e-mail to the Times LIVE iLIVE team. In the mean time, click here to view the Times LIVE iLIVE section.SecretVoice
Posted 339 days agoInExile
We do know how they voted: it was unanimous. Here is the list of Judges all concurring:
MOGOENG CJ (Yacoob ADCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Khampepe J, Maya AJ,
Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J and van der Westhuizen J concurring):
Timbuck9
Posted 339 days agoWas this motion passed because H.R.H. Sisulu is taking over the Dept of Public Works????
Just to make sure they do NOT RUN AMOK when they throw their toys out of their cots?
deebee
Posted 339 days agoToday it's very different: union 'leaders' are a pathetic bunch of rabble rousing trailer trash who clearly believe that the right to strike is the same thing as the right to destroy. They're weak, have no vision, no leadership and no ability to do anything other than threaten, destroy and shout pathetic, outdated tub-thumping, empty slogans that are so stupid and outdated they'd make the Cubans and North Koreans blush.
KafreeMoneykey
I think we should welcome this progressive ruling without referring to the events of the past. This ruling will definitely stop thuggery and hooliganism and will force the union leadership to account. Well done Mogoeng Mogoeng, the one who was referred to as a Zuma crony with no experience not so long ago by the DA! Kudos to you Sir, you have touched the untouchables with this ruling! Well done, you indeed making Hebron proud!
deebee
"I think we should welcome this progressive ruling without referring to the events of the past."
I think the fact that in the past people were routinely arrested, beaten, shot at and harrassed by the police when embarking on peaceful marches in the past is exactly what we need to consider. It is within this context that the lawlessness of the current mob needs to be seen.
The marches I refer to were ANC/Union marches that used to wind their way through town and Braamfontein. I was a student and used to watch them from my flat in Jorrisen Street - there was always beautiful singing, toyi-toyiing, banners, colour and good humoured marchers: never violent clashes from what I remember; never trashing and looting; never mindless inciting of violence by 'leaders' - on the contrary, they exhorted their supporters to be peaceful and disciplined. They were real leaders. They showed real leadership. They were honourable people. I can't think of anyone in COSATU today that I would describe in those terms, when it comes to strikes and marches.
SecretVoice
RSA.MommaCyndi
Posted 339 days agoFreeSpeech
Posted 339 days agoShongweni
Posted 339 days agoTheye
Posted 339 days agoInExile
This is copied from the heading:
Case CCT 112/11[2012] ZACC 13
Heard on : 9 February 2012
Decided on : 13 June 2012
JUDGMENT
MOGOENG CJ (Yacoob ADCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Khampepe J, Maya AJ,
Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J and van der Westhuizen J concurring):
Theye
Posted 339 days agocANCerSurvivor
Posted 339 days agoHow does this ruling at all infringe on the workers right to strike? You can strike and toyi toyi all you want, just remember that property, both public and private, is not on strike with you and therefore you never should have been breaking other people's stuff during the strikes in the first place...