Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-05-21 00:08:55 +02:00 | justin | No I do not | All of the above | Section 25 Rights: State Acquisition of Capital | The whole amendment is over reach by the state, and it could be used for nefarious reasons , were the state to slide into further economic troubles, and could be used to target and penalize individuals. i.e. social credit system in china. Which totally goes against the constitution. |
2026-05-20 22:31:36 +02:00 | Rosanna | No I do not | All of the above | Section 25 Rights: State Acquisition of Capital | This is against everything a democracy stands for. |
2026-05-20 21:32:44 +02:00 | James | No I do not | All of the above | Regulatory Overreach: Defining 'Anything of Value' as Capital | This shows the ANC wants to ensure poverty for anybody who earned honestly. These are legislated excuses for theft from those who earned it by WORKING. |
2026-05-20 21:27:57 +02:00 | Hason | No I do not | All of the above | Regulatory Overreach: Defining 'Anything of Value' as Capital | |
2026-05-20 21:26:24 +02:00 | Gloria | No I do not | All of the above | Regulatory Overreach: Defining 'Anything of Value' as Capital | This is against everything a democracy stands for. Another excuse to steal from those who worked for their assets. |
Supporters of the draft regulations, primarily the National Treasury and the South African Reserve Bank (SARB), argue that these changes are a vital step toward a modern financial system.
-
- Modernizing Outdated Laws: The current regulations are over 60 years old and were written long before the internet or digital assets existed. Moving to a “risk-based” system allows the State to focus on high-risk, high-value movements of money rather than policing every small transaction.
- Global Security & Compliance: To stay off international “grey lists” (like FATF), South Africa must prove it can track and stop money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Explicitly regulating crypto assets as “capital” closes a loophole often used by illicit actors to move wealth undetected across borders.
- Protecting the South African Rand (ZAR): Uncontrolled capital flight—where billions in value leave the country via digital wallets—can destabilize the national currency. These regulations ensure the State has the visibility needed to manage economic stability.
- Building a Regulated Fintech Industry: By creating a formal “Authorised Crypto Asset Service Provider” (ACASP) category, the State is providing a legal pathway for legitimate businesses to operate, which they argue will actually attract institutional investment.
Opponents, including civil society groups, legal scholars, and “Bitcoiners,” argue that the draft is a radical overreach that compromises the Bill of Rights.
-
- A “Privacy Death-Knell”: Granting enforcement officers the power to search personal devices for digital “control” at borders is viewed as a massive violation of the Section 14 right to privacy.
- Forced Self-Incrimination: Regulation 25(5), which compels citizens to hand over private keys and passwords, is highly controversial. Critics argue this forces individuals to provide the evidence for their own financial “prosecution,” violating Section 35 of the Constitution.
- De Facto Expropriation: The power of the Treasury to “attach” assets based on mere suspicion—without a criminal trial—and the ability to force the sale of private crypto into ZAR is seen by many as a violation of property rights.
- Stifling the “Digital Gold” Economy: Critics argue that treating a borderless technology like Bitcoin as if it were physical gold will drive innovation and young tech talent out of South Africa. They fear these “permission-based” rules will make South Africa an uncompetitive “digital island”.