2 September 2024
Socal grant applicants queue at the Eerste River SASSA office. Archive photo: Ashraf Hendricks
A challenge to the rules for the R370-a-month Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant will be heard in the Pretoria High Court on 29 and 30 October.
In 2023 #PayTheGrants and the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) filed an application at the Pretoria High Court to challenge regulations which they say exclude many eligible people from getting the grant.
The Minister of Social Development and the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) have been listed as respondents in the application. The Minister of Finance is also a respondent.
The SRD grant was introduced in 2020 at the start of the Covid pandemic as an emergency measure to alleviate extreme poverty and hunger. It was to be paid for six months from May 2020 to October 2020, but each year since then, it has been extended. The grant was increased in April from R350 to R370 a month.
Only people earning up to R625 a month are eligible for the grant. Every month, SASSA monitors recipients’ bank accounts to check their income.
In the court application, #PayTheGrants and the IEJ argue that the government’s definition of “income” is too broad, since it includes financial support from family and friends. They want the court to rule that “income” should only be money received from employment, business activities or investments.
They also want the court to rule that the grant and income threshold for eligibility should be increased to take inflation and the cost of living into account.
They also challenge the way SASSA uses databases including those of SARS, the National Student Financial Aid Scheme and the Unemployment Insurance Fund, to verify income. They say some of the databases are inaccurate and want the court to declare the database verification unlawful and unconstitutional. They say bank verification does not consider fluctuations in the recipients’ income and want the court to prohibit bank verification.
Applications for the SRD grant can only be made online, unlike other social grants that can be applied for in person. The IEJ and #PayTheGrants say some applicants cannot access the internet and want the court to rule that in-person applications should be allowed.
They say the current appeal process does not allow an applicant for the grant to bring forward new evidence, and they want the appeal process to be declared irrational and unreasonable.
In his affidavit, Department of Social Development chief director of legal services Ebenezer Nkosinathi Dladla defended the online application system.
“The cell phone data does not even require data and one cellphone number can be used by five applicants,” he said.
“The process is so easy, in that all SRD applicants can choose their method of application being either the special SRD website which guides them with questions through the process or the WhatsApp channel which does the same. This process does not even take more than 20 minutes,” said Dladla.
He said the SRD grant was “one of the most successful” in the country. “The online method is the most effective and efficient,” he said. “The entire world is technologically transforming, so is South Africa”.
He said applicants without smartphones, “can use their family members, neighbours and peers’ cell phones”.
“The online application for the SRD is not complicated at all … if they are in the rural areas they can go to the tribal authority and or the community leader in the village to request assistance,” said Dladla
Dladla said the online process is easier than visiting SASSA offices and reiterated that a manual process would be “regressive” and delay timely assistance. He dismissed the unconstitutionality claims.
Source: SASSA
In his affidavit SASSA executive manager Brenton van Vrede defended the use of government databases in the SRD grant verification system. This prevents “double-dipping” by applicants who receive funds from other government institutions and apply for the SRD grant.
He said that using multiple databases for verification is both “reasonable and necessary”.
SASSA verifies over 15-million SRD applications monthly, he said, and the number of approved beneficiaries ranges from 7.5-million to 8.5-million each month.
Van Vrede said SASSA has “limited human resource capacity” and adding manual processes could lead to staff strikes, which would harm those seeking assistance.
On the appeal process, Van Vrede said if an application is declined, applicants can appeal on the DSD’s website, with a turnaround time of 90 days. If the appeal is successful, SASSA will process the payment.
He also dismissed the claims of unconstitutionality by the applicants.
In his affidavit, Treasury then acting director-general Edgar Sishi said the regulations do not violate the constitutional right to social security. “They facilitate greater access to social security,” Sishi argued, “and provide as much coverage and protection to the most vulnerable South Africans that the state can afford at the moment.”
He cautioned that any court order invalidating the regulations could have “disastrous economic consequences”. Any such order should be suspended to allow the DSD minister to address issues without causing budgetary strain.