| dc.description.abstract | A full sixteen years after the coming into force of the 1996 Constitution, Parliament
responded to the constitutional obligation to regulate and monitor, by legislative and
other means, the use of official languages by adopting the Use of Official Languages Act
12 of 2012. The Act represents a very limited normative appreciation of this
constitutional instruction. The official language clause of the Constitution expresses a
normative commitment regarding the positive affirmation of linguistic diversity, which is
directly informed by and closely aligned to the core normative values of the
Constitution. The Constitution’s positive evaluation of difference, including linguistic
difference, inter alia, flows from the values of substantive equality, equal citizenship,
dignity and proportionality. However, the way in which the Act institutionalises the
promotion of inclusive linguistic diversity does not reflect an unambiguous recognition
of this obligation being normatively embedded in the foundational value structure of the
Constitution. The real responsibility for decisions regarding official language use is
located in the policy-making competence of non-independent administrative bodies. The
Act itself is devoid of instructive standards of its own to guide administrative decisionmaking
regarding official language use. This results in the responsibility for making the
most important normative choices regarding the use of official languages not being
reserved for the legislative process, but entrusted to non-independent advisory
administrative bodies. The nature of the Act confirms that it never was the intention of
the government to be bound by legislation in this respect. This modus operandi is democratically deficient and compromises both the separation of powers and the
principle of legal certainty as fundamental tenets of the rule of law. | en_US |
