The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria is set to deliberate next month on a case brought forward by #PayTheGrants and the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ), challenging the rules governing the R370 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant. The organizations contend that the current application process unfairly excludes eligible individuals and violates constitutional rights.
The Department of Social Development (DSD), the South African Social Security Agency (Sassa), and the Ministry of Finance have defended the regulations, asserting they are efficient and constitutionally sound.
Scheduled for 29 and 30 October, the case arises from a 2023 application by #PayTheGrants and the IEJ. The organizations argue that the eligibility criteria and income verification methods for the SRD grant are flawed. Respondents in the matter include the Minister of Social Development, Sassa, and the Minister of Finance.
Background on the SRD Grant
Initially introduced in May 2020 as a temporary response to the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, the SRD grant was intended to last six months. However, it has been extended annually and increased from R350 to R370 per month in April 2023. The grant is available to individuals earning up to R625 monthly, with Sassa monitoring recipients’ bank accounts to confirm income levels.
Key Issues Raised
In their court submission, #PayTheGrants and the IEJ have taken issue with the government’s definition of “income,” which they argue is too broad as it includes financial help from friends and family. They are advocating for a narrower definition limited to earnings from employment, business activities, or investments.
The applicants also call for a higher income threshold, considering inflation and rising living costs. They challenge the use of various government databases, including those of SARS, NSFAS, and UIF, for income verification, claiming inaccuracies render the process unfair. Furthermore, they want the court to prohibit bank verification, citing its failure to account for fluctuations in income.
Another key concern is the exclusively online application process. Unlike other social grants, SRD applications cannot be submitted in person. The IEJ and #PayTheGrants argue this policy disadvantages individuals without internet access and are pushing for an in-person application option.
Finally, they criticize the grant appeal process, claiming it lacks the flexibility to present new evidence and is therefore unreasonable and irrational.
Government’s Defense
In response, the DSD’s chief legal officer, Ebenezer Nkosinathi Dladla, defended the online application system, calling it efficient and accessible. He pointed out that the process can be completed using a basic cellphone, even without data, and noted that applicants in rural areas could seek help from community leaders.
Dladla described the SRD grant system as one of the country’s most successful initiatives, arguing that a shift to manual applications would be regressive and delay much-needed assistance.
Sassa executive manager Brenton van Vrede also defended the current verification system, emphasizing its necessity to prevent applicants from receiving multiple benefits from government programs. He highlighted that Sassa processes over 15 million applications monthly, approving between 7.5 and 8.5 million beneficiaries.
On appeals, Van Vrede stated that applicants could submit their cases online, with a resolution expected within 90 days.
Treasury’s Position
Former acting Director-General of Treasury, Edgar Sishi, maintained that the regulations align with constitutional provisions for social security. He warned that invalidating the current framework could have severe economic consequences and suggested that any changes should allow time for adjustments to avoid budgetary disruption.
This case has significant implications for the future of the SRD grant program and the accessibility of social assistance for South Africa’s most vulnerable citizens