Read on Twitter
On 15 March 2020 a National State of Disaster was declared.
The declaration is invalid as it does not meet the criteria for a 'disaster' as set out by the DMA.
This declaration must be set aside and regulations consequently issued must be declared invalid.
The declaration is invalid as it does not meet the criteria for a 'disaster' as set out by the DMA.
This declaration must be set aside and regulations consequently issued must be declared invalid.
The declaration stated:
"Considering the magnitude and severity of the COVID -19 outbreak which has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and classified as a national disaster by the Head of the National Disaster Management Centre,"
"Considering the magnitude and severity of the COVID -19 outbreak which has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and classified as a national disaster by the Head of the National Disaster Management Centre,"
It is however not upon the WHO nor on the NDMC to determine what constitutes a 'disaster' ito the DMA.
The DMA itself provides a definition for 'disaster' and only in terms of this definition may a disaster be declared.
The DMA itself provides a definition for 'disaster' and only in terms of this definition may a disaster be declared.
"Up to 45,000 South Africans are expected to die from Covid-19 over the next two to three years, says one of the eminent doctors advising President Cyril Ramaphosa"
"This is a shocking number, but it is much lower than an earlier estimate of between 120,000 and 150,000 fatalities." https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2020-04-21-expect-45000-deaths-and-two-to-three-years-of-intermittent-lockdowns-says-expert/
Dr Glenda Gray, a member of the Ministerial Advisory Committee (MAC) and chairperson of the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), said the lockdown should be eradicated completely, ..."
"... and that non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), such as handwashing, wearing masks, social distancing and prohibitions on gatherings, should be put in place. " https://m.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/unscientific-and-nonsensical-top-scientific-adviser-slams-governments-lockdown-strategy-20200516
According to Stats SA
P0309.3 Mortality and causes of death in South Africa: Findings from death notification 2017
42 202 South Africans died from diseases of the respiratory system and
78 562 South Africans died from certain infectious and parasitic diseases in 2017.
P0309.3 Mortality and causes of death in South Africa: Findings from death notification 2017
42 202 South Africans died from diseases of the respiratory system and
78 562 South Africans died from certain infectious and parasitic diseases in 2017.
The Stats SA report also indicates that in the 3 years up to and including 2017;
93 225 South Africans died from tuberculosis
60 044 South Africans died from Influenza and pneumonia.
93 225 South Africans died from tuberculosis
60 044 South Africans died from Influenza and pneumonia.
In his speech announcing the lockdown President Ramaphosa stated:
“I am concerned that a rapid rise in infections will stretch our health services beyond what we can manage and many people will not be able to access the care they need.”
“I am concerned that a rapid rise in infections will stretch our health services beyond what we can manage and many people will not be able to access the care they need.”
On 9 April the President stated:
"Our approach is to screen in communities and test people in hospitals, clinics and mobile clinics, to isolate those who are infected, and to care for those who are ill in our health facilities."
"Our approach is to screen in communities and test people in hospitals, clinics and mobile clinics, to isolate those who are infected, and to care for those who are ill in our health facilities."
On 20 April the President stated:
“Our goal is to steadily reduce the alert level by keeping the rate of infection down and getting our health system ready for the inevitable increase in cases.”
“Our goal is to steadily reduce the alert level by keeping the rate of infection down and getting our health system ready for the inevitable increase in cases.”
And also,
“The transition to the next phase of the coronavirus response, that of recovery, will be more difficult than the present one. The risk of infection outbreaks will increase. The demands on our clinics and hospitals and medical personnel will grow.”
“The transition to the next phase of the coronavirus response, that of recovery, will be more difficult than the present one. The risk of infection outbreaks will increase. The demands on our clinics and hospitals and medical personnel will grow.”
On 11 May the President stated:
“Imposing a nation-wide lockdown gave our country a strategic advantage. It bought us valuable time to prepare our health system and put in place containment measures.”
“Imposing a nation-wide lockdown gave our country a strategic advantage. It bought us valuable time to prepare our health system and put in place containment measures.”
It is common cause that the majority of our citizens cannot cope with any health emergency within the scope of ‘using only their own resources’.
"These schemes have 4.02 million registered members, serving a total of 8.87 million beneficiaries."
https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/346434/these-are-the-biggest-medical-aid-schemes-in-south-africa/amp/
"These schemes have 4.02 million registered members, serving a total of 8.87 million beneficiaries."
https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/346434/these-are-the-biggest-medical-aid-schemes-in-south-africa/amp/
The definition of ‘disaster’ in the DMA provides for the following:
“disaster” means a progressive or sudden, widespread or localised. natural or human-caused occurrence which-
“disaster” means a progressive or sudden, widespread or localised. natural or human-caused occurrence which-
(a) causes or threatens to cause-
(i) death, injury or disease;
(ii) damage to property, infrastructure or the environment; or
(iii) disruption of the life of a community; AND
(i) death, injury or disease;
(ii) damage to property, infrastructure or the environment; or
(iii) disruption of the life of a community; AND
(b) is of a magnitude that EXCEEDS the ability of those affected by the disaster to cope with its effects using only their OWN RESOURCES.
Declaring a state of disaster on the basis of government’s lack of resources seems to fall outside the ambit of the DMA.
Should this fall within the ambit of the DMA then South Africa would be in a permanent state of disaster given the permanent constraints of the public healthcare system.
This conclusion is untenable.
This conclusion is untenable.
On 20 April President Ramaphosa stated that:
“There can be no greater anguish than that of a parent whose children cry out to them for food, but they have none to give .
."
“There can be no greater anguish than that of a parent whose children cry out to them for food, but they have none to give .
."
" ... Over the past three weeks, we have been confronted with distressing images of desperate people clamouring for food parcels at distribution centres and of community protests against food shortages.”
It would rather appear that the declaration of a disaster in terms of the DMA and the subsequent lockdown regulations have created a ‘disaster’ in itself as defined by the DMA.
This current 'disaster' does not meet the standard set for a 'disaster' in terms of the DMA.
As such the court should be asked to declare all actions and regulations issued under the current 'state of disaster' invalid.
As such the court should be asked to declare all actions and regulations issued under the current 'state of disaster' invalid.
Further to the above the following:
On 19'th of May News 24 reported Dr Zweli Mkize as saying the following:
"The lockdown effectively stalled the exponential spread of the coronavirus, allowing the healthcare sector to prepare for the rising wave of infections and deaths."
"The lockdown effectively stalled the exponential spread of the coronavirus, allowing the healthcare sector to prepare for the rising wave of infections and deaths."
"Had we not traded freedom for time, hospitals would now be overwhelmed, and our concern would have been drawn away from saving lives by the need to excavate mass graves for those we would have lost." https://m.news24.com/Columnists/GuestColumn/zweli-mkhize-collective-effort-by-every-citizen-worthy-in-the-effort-to-combat-covid-19-20200519
It is clear from the minister's statement and from previous statements by government that the lockdown had two intentions:
1) Stalling the exponential spread of the coronavirus, also known a 'flattening the curve'.
1) Stalling the exponential spread of the coronavirus, also known a 'flattening the curve'.
2) By 'flattening the curve' to provide time for the healthcare sector to prepare for the rising wave of infections.
I have dealt with the fact that the healthcare sector for the vast majority of South Africans do not fall under 'own resources' but rather under 'government resources'.
From the statement above it would appear that the healthcare sector is now prepared.
From the statement above it would appear that the healthcare sector is now prepared.
The minister also lists some of the preparations to date:
"The time gained in this period has not gone to waste.
More than 10 million citizens have been screened for symptoms of the virus; 376 quarantine sites have been identified across the country, ..."
"The time gained in this period has not gone to waste.
More than 10 million citizens have been screened for symptoms of the virus; 376 quarantine sites have been identified across the country, ..."
" ... adding more than 30?000 quarantine beds to our health capacity; almost half a million people have been tested for Covid-19; field hospitals have been constructed; and millions of units of personal protective equipment have been procured."
The minister also made the following statement:
"If people are allowed to flood back to the way life was before, infections would surge, effectively undoing everything that has been sacrificed thus far. "
"If people are allowed to flood back to the way life was before, infections would surge, effectively undoing everything that has been sacrificed thus far. "
Whilst people 'flooding back to life' most certainly cannot undue the provisions made by the healthcare system one can make a case that ending the lockdown may lead to a higher rate of infections.
What remains inevitable is that a certain percentage of the population will get infected with the virus regardless of the rate of infection.
Should one, for the sake of argument, presume that the meaning of 'own resources' include 'government resources' (which for several reasons I would say you can not) then one of two options apply:
1) Government, and the healthcare sector in general, has made sufficient provisions to cope with a rise in cases needing medical attention.
2) Government, and the healthcare sector in general, has made sufficient provisions to cope given a certain infection rate for the spread of the virus.
The second option seems to be the case as also indicated by a statement made by Alan Winde, Premier of the Western Cape on 10 May;
"It is worth reiterating that we cannot avoid this virus — many of us will become infected. Our role is to slow its spread through our own personal behaviour choices, so that more people can receive treatment when they need it." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businesslive.co.za/amp/bd/opinion/2020-05-10-alan-winde-we-cant-avoid-covid-19-but-we-must-slow-its-spread-by-how-we-behave/
He continues;
"Each of our actions now will determine whether our health system will cope. It is up to us all."
And here he makes a valid point.
"It is up to us all".
"Each of our actions now will determine whether our health system will cope. It is up to us all."
And here he makes a valid point.
"It is up to us all".
Should we accept that 'goverment resources' fall within the legislature's intent with 'own resources' then the following question becomes pertinent;
Can citizens grasp the importance of health directives relating to the spread of the disease (eg social distancing, hand washing and hygiene) and act accordingly?
If so then personal responsiblity for 'flattening the curve' surely falls within 'own resources'?
If so then personal responsiblity for 'flattening the curve' surely falls within 'own resources'?
I fail to see how an argument can be made that the general public is unable to grasp the importance of health directives and act within their 'own resources'
BUT
BUT
that they can grasp a slew of confusing and at times irrational regulations issued to assist them to cope with a disaster which they can not cope with within their 'own resources'.
The inevitable spread of the Corona virus does not constitute a 'Disaster' as defined by the DMA.
As such the declaration of a national state of disaster on 15 March 2020 should be set aside together with all the regulations issued under this 'state of disaster'.
As such the declaration of a national state of disaster on 15 March 2020 should be set aside together with all the regulations issued under this 'state of disaster'.