Ramaphosa Defends Equity Act Amidst Legal Fire from DA
President says law is essential to redress apartheid injustices — DA warns of “race over merit” approach.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has come out strongly in defense of the controversial Employment Equity Amendment Act, describing it as a necessary tool to correct the deep-rooted inequalities left by apartheid. In his weekly newsletter published in May 2025, Ramaphosa argued that the legislation is not about exclusion but about inclusion — especially for Black South Africans, women, and people with disabilities.
“The Act is not an attack on merit or excellence,” Ramaphosa wrote, “but rather a means to ensure that all South Africans have equal access to opportunity — something apartheid actively denied to the majority.”
His comments follow a court challenge by the Democratic Alliance (DA), which has taken the matter to the Pretoria High Court, arguing that the Act imposes unconstitutional, race-based employment quotas. According to the DA, these sector-specific racial targets could undermine the economy, reduce job opportunities, and marginalize skilled candidates — particularly from the Coloured and Indian communities.
“The DA needs to explain why they oppose efforts to build a more equitable economy,” Ramaphosa fired back, suggesting the party’s stance favors preserving historical privilege rather than dismantling systemic inequality.
The legislation, passed in 2023 and implemented in phases, empowers the Minister of Employment and Labour to set demographic targets by industry and region, sparking nationwide debate. Critics fear it could lead to reverse discrimination and dampen investor confidence. Supporters, however, see it as a long-overdue move toward real transformation in South Africa’s labor market.
As legal proceedings unfold, the court’s decision could significantly shape the future of economic transformation in South Africa, potentially redrawing the line between equity and meritocracy in post-apartheid society.
📍Will the court uphold the government’s right to enforce transformation — or will it agree with the DA’s call to protect individual merit from state-mandated quotas?
