Trade union Solidarity said it remains steadfast in its fight against the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill, despite losing a court battle this week in which it sought to halt appointments connected to the NHI Branch.
The Gauteng High Court dismissed the union’s application. Solidarity sought to have certain decisions reviewed, set aside and declared unlawful.
Some of these include the decision to advertise and fill 44 technical specialist vacancies; the decision to establish five chief directorates in the NHI Branch; the establishment of a transitional functional organisation, with posts on June 2, 2022; and Treasury’s approval to shift funds to the compensation of Employees’ Budget.
Solidarity’s Anton van der Bijl told “The Mercury” on Thursday that the union wanted to stop the appointments as they were based on an act that does not exist at this point.
“It was an application to the High Court to halt the appointment of certain employees in terms of the NHI, which has not been finalised.
The argument was that you cannot appoint personnel if there is no NHI Act, which enacts your right to employ personnel.”
Van der Bijl said the union was disappointed by the ruling but remained determined to challenge the implementation of NHI.
“At the end of the day this is only the opening shots fired in the war against the NHI. We deem the NHI in totality as unlawful, illegal, irrational and unethical and we will continue with our fight against the NHI.”
He said Solidarity was finalising its court papers to challenge the NHI Act in totality.
“When the president finds his pen and decides to sign the bill into law, we will proceed with our litigation steps against the act.”
Van der Bijl asked where the Department of Health’s feasibility study for NHI was.
He said there was either a legal or an ethical obligation for the department to ensure that a proper study had been done to determine if NHI was sustainable.
“Our argument is that there was no feasibility study done, and if it was done it would have been clear to our government and South Africa that the NHI is most certainly not feasible. We don’t have the money or the administration to administer such a fund,” said Van der Bijl.
He said Solidarity would head back to court in June for another leg in the NHI battle, this time against the “certification of need”, which tells health professionals where they can practise.
The Department of Health welcomed the court’s decision.
Department spokesperson Foster Mohale said the court found that the establishment of the NHI Branch as part of the department’s organisational structure did not amount to the implementation of the bill.
He said: “The functions of the branch remain relevant for any health system in the world, public or private.
“Thus, the creation of these critical posts responsible for among others, health products procurement, healthcare benefits and provider management, health system digital information, risk and fraud management, and user and service provider management, are part of broader health system strengthening.”
Mohale said the ruling paved the way for the department to prepare for the roll-out of NHI once it had been signed into law.
“The judgment simply means the department has got the right to continue with the work to strengthen the public health system of the country to respond to the health-care needs and demands of the population,” he said.
The Mercury