Advocate Matthew Chaskalson SC, who leads the evidence, has made it clear that the findings of the Madlanga Commission do not have the force of law. He emphasized that the commission’s role is limited to making recommendations to the President, rather than issuing orders or binding decisions. He pointed out that the main job of the commission is to hold public hearings where people can share their views and evidence. These hearings help the commission gather information needed to form their recommendations.
Adv. Chaskalson explained that while the commission investigates and listens carefully to different voices, its function stops at advising the President about what steps might be taken next. The President then decides what should be done based on the commission’s suggestions. This structure ensures that the findings are considered seriously but are not enforced automatically. The commission acts more like an important advisor rather than a decision-maker.
He highlighted that the public hearings are a key part of this process because they allow transparency and input from the community. The commission listens to a variety of testimony and opinions, which help it understand the full picture of the issue at hand. This careful listening shapes the advice given to the President. Because the commission does not have the power to enforce its recommendations, its influence depends largely on the President’s willingness to take action.
Matthew Chaskalson SC stressed that the Madlanga Commission is there to gather information and provide guidance through its recommendations, but it does not have the power to make binding decisions. The commission’s task is to conduct open public hearings for this reason. The ultimate decision rests with the President on how to respond to the advice coming from the commission’s work. This process is designed to ensure that decisions are made with careful consideration but remain within the constitutional framework.
