Relocation minor child South Africa Advocate Abduroaf Singapore

Relocation minor child South Africa Advocate Abduroaf Singapore

Related Post

The prohibition of wearing headscarves for females at work and places of learning despite religious convictions and the Supreme Law of the Republic of South Africa – The Constitution.

What practical use is the fundamental right to freedom, when you are not free to be free? What practical use is the fundamental right to practice one’s universally recognised religion, but you are told not to do so by your employer or educator?  Is brilliant legislation and policies meticulously crafted, framed and inked with scented oils onto canvas, of any practical worth, if it merely serves as an apparent reference, but not to be rigorously enforced and revered? This informative article has been undoubtedly inspired by the civil matter between Major Fatima Isaacs and the South African National Defence Force. Major Isaacs is facing possible dismissal for resolutely refusing to surreptitiously remove her hijab (headscarf) after being commanded to do so. What you will be reading does not deal with the latter case per se. However, in order to naturally keep it evergreen, it deals with the fundamental Constitutional principles at play.

Does the Constitution adequately protect one from religious oppression?

Is forcing someone to act directly contrary to his or her religious beliefs and moral convictions, not a grave form of oppression? Now, does the law, independent judiciary, and the modern state, actually adequately protect and rigorously enforce the civil rights of women to sufficiently cover their heads with a headscarf due to their religious tenants and convictions? May a female be forced to remove it, if such action would mean she is acting contrary to her religion and convictions, despite our Constitution? Hence, what does our Constitution state? With Thursday passed being the 10th observed anniversary of Nelson Mandela International Day, we naturally thought it opportune to gently tap into the modest wealth of knowledge of Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf, an advocate of the High Court of South Africa. He holds a Master of Laws Degree (LL.M) in Constitutional Litigation and weathered with over a decade and a half of successful litigation experience. Read on and find out what he has to say on the constitutional issue raised and enjoy him journeying us through the past.

What does Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf have to say on religious rights?

Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf: Sometimes, to adequately understand the present, one needs to sufficiently know the historic past. South Africa was plagued with racial discrimination in the dark challenging past. Its era formally began in the late 1940s when the National Party came into power. However, laws intentionally discriminating against non-whites were in existence prior to that. Laws were arrogantly created which directly afforded certain racial groups superiority and social dominance over others, in various facets of ordinary life. This can be illustrated by the following:
  • Various population groups were created. You would be classified as white, black, Indian coloured, etc.;
  • The use of public services and civic amenities was ethnically based on the distinctive colour of your skin. Hence certain beaches were reserved for fair-skinned people, and you could not sit (or stand) anywhere on a bus if you were of a darker shade;
  • Depending on the colour of your skin, you could only work in a certain industry. Unmistakably, certain racial groups would be capable of better empowering themselves;
  • If you were classified as being white, you would be lawfully entitled to the best of state provided education;
  • Mixed marriages were prohibited as well as extramarital sex between white and black people;
  • Your skin colour would instantly determine the private land you may rightfully own and where you may live;
  • Pass laws were rigorously enforced; and
  • Presidential elections were undoubtedly not free and fair.
The architects of Apartheid clearly knew what they were doing and meticulously executed their plan. One does not have to possess a doctoral degree in human rights to tacitly agree that the Apartheid laws were degrading, humiliating and a lasting disgrace to the very thread of humanity. Nonetheless, it was rigorously enforced by the courts of law, the police force, the military, and the navy, to mention a few. Naturally, the lasting legacy of apartheid still lives on in our local communities. When will this sadly end?

The birth of our Democratic Constitution and the right to freedom or religion

The demolishment of the fundamental pillars of apartheid on paper is intimately associated with the humble birth of our Constitution. We initially had the Interim Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993, which was assented to on 25 January 1994. And then we had the final Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. Let us quote section 1 of the final Constitution:  “1. Republic of South Africa The Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state founded on the following values:  
  1. Human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.
 
  1. Non-racialism and non-sexism.
 
  1. Supremacy of the constitution and the rule of law.
 
  1. Universal adult suffrage, a national common voters roll, regular elections and a multi-party system of democratic government, to ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness.”
  What a wonderful piece of necessary legislation. It starkly contradicts past apartheid laws, social policies, and practices. Now the fundamental question is precisely; how supreme is it? For this, we look earnestly at Chapter 2 of the Constitution which we quote next:   “2. Supremacy of Constitution This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic; law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid, and the obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled.”   What do you make of this? It does not only pronounce that racially discriminatory laws are invalid but at the same time, unconstitutional conduct is invalid as well. The section further places an obligation on the State and the general public to adhere to the spirit and letter of the Constitution. Therefore, all the Apartheid laws and practices which violated human rights are automatically invalid. On paper at least. The Bill of Rights Now we move to the social issue of civil Human rights as entrenched in our Constitution. Chapter 2 of our Constitution deals with the Bill of rights. Let us quote section 7 of the Bill: “7. Rights
  1. This Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of democracy in South Africa. It enshrines the rights of all people in our country and affirms the democratic values of human dignity, equality and freedom.”
This section is a radical change from what was the law and policy of South Africa during the Apartheid regime. Due to our Constitution, Apartheid is supposed to have vanished from our law books. Now let us unpack the Bill of Rights next. Chapter 2 deals with the following rights, and more:
  • Equality
  • Human Dignity
  • Life
  • Freedom and Security of the Person
  • Slavery, Servitude and Forced Labour
  • Privacy
  • Freedom of Religion, Belief and Opinion
  • Freedom of Expression
  • Assembly, Demonstration, Picket and Petition
  • Freedom of Association
  • Political Rights
  • Citizenship
  • Freedom of Movement and Residence
  • Freedom of Trade, Occupation and Profession
  • Labour Relations
  • Environment
  • Property
  • Housing
  • Health Care, Food Water and Social Security
  • Children
  • Education
  • Language and Culture
  • Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities
  • Access to Information
However, for the practical purpose of this article, we shall look keenly at the right to religion. This is entrenched in section 15 of our democratic Constitution, and it eloquently states the following:
  1. Freedom of religion, belief and opinion
  2. Everyone has the right to freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion.
Clearly, considering the introductory sections of this article in relation to the Constitution, does this not mean, that you have a right to observe and practice your religion as you are required to if it does not harm anyone else? Lastly, there is the limitation clause in our Constitution. It succinctly states the following: “36. Limitation of rights
  1. The rights in the Bill of Rights may be limited only in terms of law of general application to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom, taking into account all relevant factors, including ­
 
  1. the nature of the right;
 
  1. the importance of the purpose of the limitation;
 
  1. the nature and extent of the limitation;
 
  1. the relation between the limitation and its purpose; and
 
  1. less restrictive means to achieve the purpose.
 
  1. Except as provided in subsection (1) or in any other provision of the Constitution, no law may limit any right entrenched in the Bill of Rights.”
  After carefully considering the limitation clause, it is possible for an individual’s right to exercise his or her established religion to be limited. This is precisely where the crux of this article takes us. Is it possible for a specific employer, no matter the religious convictions of the longtime employee, to intentionally limit the proper exercise of the employee’s religious rights? Under the proper scenario, it is possible. However, one would have to be very creative and gently stretch one’s mind far to find a real-life example. One scenario could be consuming an intoxicating substance based on your religious convictions whilst on security duty at work.

Commanding an employee or student not to wear a headscarf due to her religious convictions and beliefs

Promptly returning to the controversial question posed earlier on; may an employer or educator direct a female to remove her headscarf where such removal would be tantamount to a fundamental violation of her religious beliefs? At first glance, one would answer no. It would be unpermitted. It would be in violation of the employee’s right to dignity and religious practice. Accordingly, the first necessary step is established which is correctly identifying a fundamental right which is protected under the Bill of Rights. This is the right to freedom of religion. However, remember, there is a limitation clause found in section 36(1) of our Constitution referred to above. Properly applying section 36(1) of our democratic Constitution, it is comprehensible that a right to wear a headscarf is fundamental and may not be limited. The employer or educator must have very good grounds to justify the limitation of those rights. If it is due to its uniform policy, or tradition, then that is not enough. If it relates to potential life-threatening dangers that the employer, educator, employee or student and others may suffer if a headscarf is worn; then in that hypothetical scenario, limiting the right may be justified.

In conclusion

We doubt that when the Freedom Charter was adopted in 1955 and the interim constitution born, that the architects, thereof, envisioned a South Africa where a woman would be forced to remove her headscarf in violation of her religious convictions. We are certain, that should Nelson Mandela been breathing today, he would have wisely held the same convictions. To all those people who are being discriminated against due to their religion or religious beliefs and convictions in the workplace, places of learning and in public, remember, you have rights which are there to protect you. It is however up to you to make use of it.

Share this article

We are certain that you found the above article useful and interesting. Please consider sharing it on the share buttons below. They include Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, WhatsApp, Gmail and more. Someone may find it useful as well. Should you require business advice or services, feel free to click on these links: Business SA | Private Legal | Envirolaws        

I require a law firm to assist me in my legal matter in the Magistrate’s Court.

What are your contact details?

If you require an Advocate Law Firm to assist you in your legal matter, feel free to contact us using the following details:
  • Tel.: 021 111 0090
  • Email.: [email protected]
The services you may instruct the firm of Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf to represent you in are as follows:

High Court matters

  • Civil claim surrounding money;
  • Interdicts;
  • Divorces (Opposed and unopposed);
  • Child Custody and guardianship disputes;
  • Relocation of minor children;
  • Various criminal matters;
  • Minor children surname changes;
  • Appeals and Reviews; and
  • Other matters.

Magistrates Court matters

  • Civil claim surrounding money;
  • Various criminal matters;
  • Interdicts;
  • Maintenance Court matters;
  • Divorces Court matters (Opposed and unopposed)’
  • Children’s Court matter; and
  • Other matters.

Constitutional Court

  • Appeals

Supreme Court of Appeal

  • Appeals and Reviews
We service clients throughout South Africa. These include: Cape Town Rustenburg Kimberley East London Nelspruit Polokwane Pietermaritzburg Bloemfontein Port Elizabeth Pretoria Durban Johannesburg

Child custody legal advice and services

Child custody is a complex legal matter as it involves a number of factors to consider when handling a
child custody case. Judging from our years of experience, we found that the parents involved often lose track of the bigger picture while emotions override. At our law offices, our job is to help parties involved keep a level head form a legal perspective and guide them as to what will be the best way forward. Sometimes a matter has been blown out of proportion while the parties involved often expect us to perform miracles – this is not how it works in the world of law. We have found that executing our legal expertise can become a very complicated ordeal when there is little co-operation. It is however, essential to highlight that the main responsibility of the family legal expert is to advise and guide you with the best way forward from a legal standpoint.

The Children’s Act 38 of 2005 – child access to grandparents

In doing so, we have constructed a number of family legal articles containing free, expert legal advice. We have used the common issues potential clients come to us with, as a guide as to what address in these articles. For instance, we had a legal a matter in which the grandparents wanted to know what their chances are in gaining custody over their grandchild. The family legal expert then stated the following using the Children’s Act 38 of 2005:

The Children’s Act 38 of 2005

The Children’s Act is the main piece of legislation dealing with matters concerning children. Section 2 of the Children’s Act deals with its objective. Reading it would give you some type of understanding regarding the Act. It is quoted as follows: “2     Objects of Act   The objects of this Act are-   (a) to promote the preservation and strengthening of families;   (b) to give effect to the following constitutional rights of children, namely-            (i)     family care or parental care or appropriate alternative care when removed from the family environment;            (ii)     social services;            (iii)     protection from maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation; and            (iv)     that the best interests of a child are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child;   (c) to give effect to the Republic’s obligations concerning the well-being of children in terms of international instruments binding on the Republic;   (d) to make provision for structures, services and means for promoting and monitoring the sound physical, psychological, intellectual, emotional and social development of children;   (e) to strengthen and develop community structures which can assist in providing care and protection for children;  (f) to protect children from discrimination, exploitation and any other physical, emotional or moral harm or hazards;  (g) to provide care and protection to children who are in need of care and protection;  (h) to recognise the special needs that children with disabilities may have; and  (i) generally, to promote the protection, development and well-being of children.”  As you can see, the Children’s Act’s object is very extensive, focused solely in the interests of the child. Now let us look at what does it say about the best interests of a child. For more information on this article, see Our only daughter is deceased. Can the Court give us sole custody and guardianship over our only grandchild, even if the father is still alive? What does the law say?   Call our law offices on 021 424 3487 and have an appointment made online for you by our friendly receptionist today!

Grounds for full custody – child access, child maintenance and divorce

When it comes to child custody grounds, there are different variables at play. Most times, if the one parent happens to be unstable, the grounds for custody will lean more strongly towards the other parent, understandably so. Having said that, a child access matter will have issues of visitation rights, divorce, child maintenance and drafting of parenting plans. These all go hand in hand when dealing with child custody. Enjoy some of our free, expert legal advice articles below which could be of help for your when it comes to child custody legal matters. Call our law offices on 021 424 3487 and have an appointment made online for you by our friendly receptionist today!

Legal advice articles – child custody, parenting plans and divorce

The articles below have been well crafted by the legal expert himself for your convenience:
  1. The Law Regarding Children – The Children’s Act 38 of 2005
  2. Child born out of wedlock: Mother will not consent to her surname change and to be registered as her biological father. What can I do?
  3. How do I get full custody over my child?
  4. Parental Child Abuse in Custody Cases
  5. Relocate with minor child. Parent Refusing Consent for a Passport
  6. Father being refused contact to his child! What are his rights as a Father?
  7. Father’s Parental Responsibilities and Rights to his Child
  8. Urgent Access to your Children without a Lawyer
  9. Parenting Plans and the Law
  10. What happens in a custody dispute where one parent is mentally ill?
  11. How to win your child custody and access court case – Tips and Tricks
Do feel free to visit our frequently asked questions page on child custody in which you can gain some clarity on the matter.   Connect with us today and have an appointment made online for you!

Do you require a video legal advice consultation?

Click here and schedule one today!