President Cyril Ramaphosa has for the second time declined to sign the Copyright Amendment Bill and the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill into law, opting instead to refer them to the Constitutional Court for further review. File picture: David Ritchie / Independent Newspapers
President Cyril Ramaphosa has for the second time declined to sign the Copyright Amendment Bill and the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill into law, opting instead to refer them to the Constitutional Court for further review.
This is a move that has artists and copyright experts on edge.
Artists and copyright specialists have continuously opposed the copyright bill, claiming that it violated their right to trade and their property rights.
Ramaphosa returned the legislation to Parliament for additional deliberation on their validity in June 2020 after declining to sign them due to constitutional concerns. These issues have not been addressed after four years.
The copyright bill seeks to empower visually impaired individuals by allowing them access to published works in accessible formats without requiring permission from copyright holders.
During a recent media briefing, Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya shed light on Ramaphosa's latest decision.
The President has expressed his concerns regarding specific provisions in the bills that were initially drafted and later reconsidered by Parliament.
In a bid to seek clarity, he has turned to the Constitutional Court, requesting their guidance on the constitutionality of these draft laws.
According to the Constitution, Ramaphosa has options.
He can either assent to bills, refer them back to Parliament for further deliberation, or, as he has chosen to do, seek a ruling from the Constitutional Court.
The concerns surrounding the Copyright Amendment Bill are significant:
- Provisions in Sections 6A, 7A, and 8A may infringe on constitutional property rights by imposing retroactive restrictions on copyright.
- The legislation grants the Minister excessive discretionary powers, raising questions about the validity of delegating such authority.
- New exceptions introduced in Sections 12A to 12D, 19B, and 19C risk contravening international obligations, potentially leading to further legal challenges.
Despite the passionate advocacy for change, Ramaphosa felt that his reservations have not been sufficiently addressed by Parliament.
The Constitutional Court is yet to rule on their constitutionality.
As the nation watches closely, the future of creative rights hangs in the balance, caught between the aspirations of artists and the intricate web of legislation designed to protect them.
kamogelo.moichela@iol.co.za
IOL Politics