Residents of the Greater Frances Baard District Municipality questioned the Marriage Bill’s commitment to gender-based equality in the first of three public hearings on the Bill in the Northern Cape, held at the Galeshewe Recreational Hall in Kimberley.
“We believe there is a discriminatory omission of polyandry in the Bill. Clause 6 makes provision for polygamy, but there is nothing on polyandry. This omission has serious implications about gender equality and is in contradiction to section 9 of the Constitution. Parliament must look at alternative measures to revise clause 6 to include polygamy and polyandry,” said one participant, Rev Des Fransman.
While welcoming the bill’s intentions to ensure equality, dignity and constitutional coherence, Rev Fransman argued that concerns around the bill’s commitment to equality undermined its objectives.
He also called for the bill to be amended to include a religious conscience clause that could protect the clergy in cases where they have refused to solemnise a marriage that contradicts their belief systems. Rev Fransman believes the bill in its current form is insufficient on this score. This would balance the rights of the LGBTQI+ community while respecting the rights of religious communities. “We believe that protecting both is the essence of our constitutional democracy,” he suggested.
Mr Andre Strauss from Hope4SA supported this view, highlighting that the only provision in the bill providing such protection is inadequate. “Clause 11(4) does not provide adequate protection, as it can be removed later, which opens up marriage officers to being taken to court or face the prospect of their licenses being revoked,” Mr Strauss suggested.
On the issue of Islamic marriages, participants suggested the bill does not recognise such marriages and they called on the committee to amend the bill to ensure the rights of parties married under Islamic law are fully protected. To remedy this, they suggested inserting a definition in clause 1 and an explicit reference in clause 3 to marriages solemnised under Islamic law. This will bring the bill in line with section 9 and 10 of the Constitution, which speak to equality. “It is no longer acceptable for an entire religious community, especially its women and children, to exist in a legal grey area,” Rev Fransman emphasised.
Meanwhile, Kgosi Kelebohile Dyandyi said that the House of Traditional Leadership welcomed the bill’s intentions to bring customary marriages, both cultural and religious, in line with all other forms of marriage and provide them with the same recognitions. The bill’s provision for recognition of traditional leaders as marriage officers was also welcomed, as it will ensure ease of access to marriage officers. He also called on the Department of Home Affairs to schedule training for all marriage officers who will receive recognition in the bill.
Kgosi Dyandyi also suggested that religious leaders are best placed to provide the pre-marital counselling that participants said is necessary to ensure that marriages remain strong.
Meanwhile, religious communities strongly objected to the clause on same-sex marriages, on the basis that it contradicts their belief that marriages can only be between a man and a woman.
Today, the committee is holding public hearings on the bill in the Gasegonyana Municipal Hall in Kuruman. The committee urges residents of greater John Taolo Gaetsewe District to come in their numbers to share their views on the Bill.
Malatswa Molepo
5 August 2025
Arrange a tour