The Liquor Bill Case

The Liquor Bill Case

Ex Parte The President of the Republic of South Africa in Re: Constitutionality of the Liquor Bill

Under Apartheid laws, the brewing, distribution and sale of liquor was very prejudicial. The Liquor Bill was aimed at rectifying the situation.

If we have a look at our Constitution we will find that Schedule 4 includes a list of issues which are to be dealt with concurrently by National and Provincial legislatures. Trade is one of these issues. Schedule 5 on the other hand deals with issues of exclusive provincial legislative competence. This schedule includes liquor licenses. The President was worried that if the matter was addressed under Schedule 5 then it would in the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces so the matter was brought before the constitutional court by President to the Court for consideration in terms of Section 84(2)(c) of the Constitution.

The Constitutional Court held that the same things overlap into Schedules 4 & 5.

“Trade” is the manufacturing and distribution which crosses provincial lines and is a Schedule 4 matter whereas “licenses” is sale and retail within the particular province and is therefore a Schedule 5 matter.

The Liquor Bill provided that a license had to be obtained at each level, and that no one entity could regulate the three areas of the liquor industry: manufacture, distribution & sale thereof. The Constitutional Court makes it clear that the Liquor Bill needed drastic reform. The issue was, “into which area does this reform fall?”

The National Government was claiming that the issue fell under Schedule 4 and therefore the National Government has the power to legislate over it.

The Provincial Government was claiming that the issue fell under Schedule 5 because it deals with liquor licenses and was therefore in the exclusive competence of the Provincial Governments.