Various organisations believe that government’s plan for cheap healthcare, the NHI, is unconstitutional and will challenge the NHI Act in court.
The Hospital Association of South Africa, that represents most private hospitals, is now also taking the National Health Insurance (NHI) battle to court, while the minister of health referred to fighting a “big war” against groups opposed to NHI at the World Economic Forum last week.
Motsoaledi said right-wing organisations, the private sector and doctors do not want NHI.
Labour union Solidarity, the Board of Healthcare Funders and the Private Practitioners’ Forum (SAPPF), that represents about 3 000 specialists and 1 500 other healthcare professionals, such as general practitioners, have already filed court papers to challenge NHI.
Now, the Hospital Association of South Africa (HASA) is also heading to court, although Melanie Da Costa, chairperson of HASA, emphasises that the organisation remains unequivocally committed to working with all stakeholders to build a healthcare system that sustainably benefits all citizens.
She added that HASA urges all involved parties to engage in a solution-oriented approach. “HASA believes the NHI is neither sustainable nor affordable and that dialogue and collaboration between all stakeholders is critical to finding and developing solutions to achieve universal health coverage.”
ALSO READ: Questions about health ministers ‘sudden’ next move with NHI
HASA deferred legal action, but Motsoaledi forcing its hand with his statements
So far, HASA has deferred filing a legal challenge to the NHI Act as it firmly believes that sustainable and affordable solutions to achieve universal health coverage for all South Africans are within reach, Da Costa says.
“However, government’s lack of response to several constructive and practical proposals, including those of Business Unity South Africa (Busa) and the minister of health’s recent public statements concerning the NHI, including regarding the imminent publication of NHI regulations, have necessitated that HASA move forward with its legal challenge to the NHI legislation.”
She says although HASA decided to proceed with legal action, it remains hopeful that the presidency will respond positively to the constructive proposals made.
“HASA remains open to engaging with government on the way forward in parallel to the legal process.
“We remain firmly committed to participating constructively while the legal process unfolds. As an organisation, we have always preferred to resolve matters through dialogue, and we believe that effective healthcare solutions are urgently needed and achievable through a reasonable and collaborative approach,” Da Costa says.
ALSO READ: Implementing recommendations of Health Market Inquiry good idea – experts
NHI constitutional issues
The SAPPF raises these constitutional issues:
- Whether the president’s decision to assent to and sign the NHI Act was constitutional and specifically whether he had or ought to have had reservations about the constitutionality of the NHI Bill and should have referred it back to parliament and if he acted rationally in assenting to the Act
- Whether the NHI Act is constitutional, specifically whether it is impermissibly vague, delegates plenary powers to the minister of health, the board of the National Health Insurance Fund and various committees and is irrational
- Whether the NHI Act as a whole, alternatively sections 5, 7, 8, 33, 35, 37, 38, 39 and 41 of the NHI Act unreasonably and unjustifiably limits the rights to dignity, freedom and security of person, freedom of trade, occupation and profession, property and access to healthcare in the Bill of Rights and
- Whether the NHI Act constitutes a reasonable measure to progressively realise the right to access healthcare in terms of section 27(2).
ALSO READ: ‘Unfounded and ridiculous’: Health minister rubbishes claims of NHI compromise
