n Tydskrif vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg - Is the Protected Disclosures Act 26 of 2000 applicable to members of parliament? : regspraak
|Article Title||Is the Protected Disclosures Act 26 of 2000 applicable to members of parliament? : regspraak|
|© Publisher:||Juta Law Publishing|
|Journal||Tydskrif vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg|
|Affiliations||1 University of Johannesburg and 2 University of Johannesburg|
|Publication Date||Jan 2011|
|Pages||815 - 829|
ISI Social Science
The Protected Disclosures Act 26 of 2000 was enacted to provide protection to employees against "occupational detriments" for blowing the whistle on corrupt activities. The act forms part of the whistle-blowing framework, which includes the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 and the Companies Act 71 of 2008. The purpose of Act 26 of 2000 is to create a culture which will facilitate the disclosure of information by employees relating to criminal and other irregular conduct that they encounter in the workplace (preamble to Act 26 of 2000; Grieve v Denel (Pty) Ltd 2003 4 BLLR 366 (LC) 368g). In both Charlton v Parliament of the Republic of South Africa and Parliament of the Republic of South Africa v Charlton the labour and labour appeal courts were faced with the question whether members of parliament are employees and employers, and whether Act 26 of 2000 is applicable to members of parliament. The answer to this question would impact on whether or not there was an automatically unfair dismissal in casu (s 187(1)(h) of the Labour Relations Act). An investigation must therefore be undertaken into whether members of parliament are in fact employers and employees for purposes of Act 26 of 2000, which is a prerequisite for section 187(1)(h) of the Labour Relations Act to be applicable.
Article metrics loading...