Justice Department won’t oppose assisted dying bid in SA

1. A Quiet U-Turn in the Union Buildings

In January 2024, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development sent the Registrar of the apex court a terse, seven-line letter: it would *not * fight the constitutional challenge launched by Dignity SA and several gravely ill citizens. Those two short paragraphs have detonated a decade of comfortable stalemate and sent a shock wave through every clinic, congregation, lecture theatre and late-night radio show in the country.

Until the letter arrived, every observer expected the state to marshal its usual arsenal: prosecutors waving the common-law crime of murder, regulators threatening to strike doctors from the roll, and Home Affairs promising bureaucratic purgatory. Instead, Pretoria has stepped aside, shifting the battlefield from “Will the Court even listen?” to “How will the eleven justices draw the line when the evidence is weighed?”

The vacuum left by the state’s retreat is already filling with motion. Hospital ethics boards have dusted off old policies, theology faculties are hosting emergency colloquia, and MPs’ in-boxes overflow with pleas for clarity from families who no longer know whether helping a loved one die makes them criminals.

---

2. The Constitutional Blueprint: Four Rights and a Philosophical Twist

Senior counsel Wim Trengove and the public-interest law firm SECTION27 have built their case on four explicit rights in the Bill of Rights:

• Section 10 – every person’s inherent dignity;
• Section 12(1) – the right to control what happens to one’s body and mind;
• Section 9 – equal protection, claimed here to argue that a blanket ban punishes the incurably ill for being ill;
• Section 7(2) – the state’s duty to respect, protect, promote and fulfil rights rather than ignore them.

Tucked between these clauses sits a fifth, less Cartesian argument: an ubuntu-inflected vision of autonomy. Instead of the rugged individualism that underpins many European rulings, the applicants insist that *real * ubuntu must include the power to refuse a life stripped of dignity. The pitch reframes the debate from “Western secularism versus African values” to “Which reading of ubuntu is truer to our constitutional soul?”

---

3. Where the Law Has Travelled Before (and Stalled)

South African judges have circled assisted dying twice in living memory. In 2015 the Supreme Court of Appeal in Stransham-Ford refused the dying Mr Stransham-Ford the order he sought, yet the unanimous bench scolded Parliament for “legislative inertia that cries out for correction.” A year later, the Constitutional Court suspended the invalidity of an implied prohibition in section 71 of the National Health Act and gave lawmakers 24 months to craft rules. The deadline came and went; MPs never produced a bill, and the legal vacuum silently crept back.

Since then, every police charge has fizzled out in plea bargains in the lower courts. The absence of binding precedent leaves doctors terrified of losing their licences, pharmacists unwilling to issue high-dose morphine for fear it will be misread as lethal intent, and desperate families scraping together R350 000 for a discreet one-way ticket to Zurich.

Enter the Health Professions Council of South Africa. Until last month, its Ethical Guidelines declared that “a practitioner shall not intentionally terminate a patient’s life.” A leaked draft revision, dated February 2024, adds a conditional escape hatch: once statute changes, doctors must document informed consent and secure a second opinion. The council, it seems, is rehearsing two antagonistic scripts - publicly opposing the constitutional case while privately polishing Plan B.

---

4. Mapping the Future: Safeguards, Costs and Cultural Cross-Currents

4.1 The Draft Safety Net

A working bill - co-drafted by Dignity SA, the Helen Suzman Foundation and two silks - proposes a two-lane process:

• Medical lane: two independent physicians (one a specialist in the condition) must confirm terminality, intolerable suffering, mental capacity and settled consent over a 15-day cooling-off period. If either doctor suspects depression, a psychiatrist must sign off.
• Legal lane: the patient’s signature is witnessed by a practising attorney who attests to voluntariness and absence of coercion. A new MAiD Review Board - doctors, lawyers, ethicists and disability advocates - reviews every case within 48 hours and publishes annual, anonymised statistics.

Any clinician, pharmacist or institution may refuse to participate, but they *must * refer the patient to a willing provider within 72 hours. No algorithmic six-month survival forecast, however accurate, may overrule holistic clinical judgment.

4.2 Money, Access and the Fear of Coercion

South Africa’s split-level health system - public sector caring for 84 % of citizens on 48 % of the health budget - fuels the worry that MAiD will be disguised cost-cutting. The Helen Suzman Foundation counters with an “equity clause”: every state facility must either offer the service or fund transfer to a willing private provider, reimbursed through a ring-fenced solidarity fund fed by tobacco and alcohol “sin taxes.” Wits Health economists project a bill of roughly R210 million a year - 0.27 % of the national health budget - assuming 3 400 cases annually.

4.3 Ubuntu, Zulu Proverbs and TikTok Memes

Radio dramas in Sepedi and isiXhosa attempt to separate ukuzinyazisa (“self-dismantling of life”) from medicinal MAiD, while township hospices distribute comic strips called “Death Literacy in the Township.” Online, the phrase As my liggaam ’n kamer word, gee my die sleutel (“When my body becomes a cage, hand me the key”) has racked up millions of views after being sampled from a viral interview with Parkinson’s patient Joan von Memerty.

Meanwhile, four provincial high courts have quietly drawn up “shadow dockets” allowing same-day emergency declaratory relief for the gravely ill, signalling that constitutional rights may outrace the legislative mill. When the jacarandas bloom in October, the eleven justices will convene; their judgment - expected early in 2025 - will decide whether dying becomes, at last, a legal choice in South Africa.

What is the current status of medically assisted dying (MAiD) in South Africa?

South Africa is actively considering the legalization of medically assisted dying. The Department of Justice has withdrawn its opposition to a constitutional challenge, shifting the decision-making to the courts. A ruling is anticipated in early 2025, which could legally establish the right for gravely ill individuals to choose to end their lives.

Why has the South African government changed its stance on opposing MAiD?

In January 2024, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development announced it would no longer fight the constitutional challenge brought by Dignity SA and several seriously ill citizens. This marks a significant shift from a decade of stalemate, indicating the government's willingness to let the judiciary determine the framework for MAiD rather than actively opposing it.

What constitutional rights are being invoked to argue for the legalization of MAiD?

The case for MAiD is built upon four key rights in the Bill of Rights: Section 10 (inherent dignity), Section 12(1) (right to bodily and mental integrity), Section 9 (equal protection, arguing that a blanket ban punishes the incurably ill), and Section 7(2) (the state's duty to respect, protect, promote, and fulfill rights). Additionally, an ubuntu-inflected vision of autonomy is presented, suggesting that true ubuntu should include the power to refuse a life devoid of dignity.

What safeguards are proposed for a potential MAiD process in South Africa?

A proposed bill outlines a two-lane process. The "Medical lane" requires two independent physicians (one a specialist) to confirm terminality, intolerable suffering, mental capacity, and settled consent, with a 15-day cooling-off period and psychiatric sign-off if depression is suspected. The "Legal lane" involves an attorney witnessing the patient's signature to attest to voluntariness and absence of coercion. A new MAiD Review Board would also review each case.

How would the cost and accessibility of MAiD be addressed in South Africa's healthcare system?

Concerns exist that MAiD could become a cost-cutting measure in South Africa's split-level health system. To counter this, an "equity clause" proposes that every state facility must either offer MAiD or fund the transfer to a willing private provider. This would be reimbursed through a ring-fenced solidarity fund, potentially financed by tobacco and alcohol "sin taxes." Initial projections estimate a cost of approximately R210 million annually for around 3,400 cases.

What cultural and societal discussions are emerging around MAiD in South Africa?

The debate around MAiD is sparking diverse cultural conversations. Radio dramas and comic strips are attempting to distinguish between traditional notions of "self-dismantling of life" (ukuzinyazisa) and medicinal MAiD. Online, phrases reflecting the desire for control over one's body at the end of life, such as "When my body becomes a cage, hand me the key," are gaining significant traction, indicating a growing public engagement with the topic.