High Court Delays S. African Constitution

This nation’s highest court refused Friday to approve the new post-apartheid constitution, ruling that it would give too much power to the central government and too little to the nine provinces.

The decision by the Constitutional Court, which must certify the document, had been expected. It is unlikely to derail or long delay final ratification of the 2-year-old democracy’s governing charter.

Leaders across the political spectrum welcomed the ruling, saying it lent legitimacy to the approval process and validated most basic rights and restrictions in the document. But the rejection, even on limited grounds, could reopen bitter arguments between the ruling African National Congress and its rivals.

President Nelson Mandela told reporters that the judgment “makes it clear that the basic structure of the constitution is acceptable.” He said he had no doubt that the Constitutional Assembly, which drafted the document, will be able to rewrite offending sections to meet the court’s objections.

The court president, Arthur Chaskalson, appeared to agree. “The instances of noncompliance, although singly and collectively important, should present no significant obstacle to the formulation of a text which complies fully,” he wrote.

In its ruling Friday, the court said nine clauses failed to comply with principles enshrined in the 1993 interim constitution. That document paved the way for South Africa’s first democratic elections, which ended the system of racial segregation known as apartheid in 1994.

The court’s chief objection concerned provisions regulating powers of the central government versus those of provincial governments. The court said the document allotted provincial powers “less than and substantially inferior to” those agreed to in 1993.

The Constitutional Assembly, made up of all 490 members of the country’s first all-race Parliament, spent two years negotiating before completing the document hours before the deadline May 8.

Cyril Ramaphosa, who chaired the assembly and is secretary-general of the ANC, said he expects the necessary new amendments to be completed within three months. The charter would then go back to the court for another review.

Officials in the Zulu nationalist Inkatha Freedom Party said the party may end its boycott of the Constitutional Assembly and re-challenge the ANC on several contentious fronts. Inkatha, led by Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, walked out of the negotiations last year over its demands for greater provincial autonomy and for international mediation to settle the issue.

The court’s other objections were considered less likely to create problems. The court said the constitution failed to guarantee independence for public ombudsmen, a public service commission and the auditor general, who monitors government spending.

In a separate ruling, the court also rejected the provincial constitution for KwaZulu-Natal province, which is controlled by Inkatha.

“KwaZulu-Natal is not an independent state,” the court said, complaining that the province gave itself too much power at the expense of the national government.