# Summary

- Link: https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/
- Published: 2025-10-06T12:52:54+02:00
- Author: dearSA

_Advert_

_Advert – scroll down_

Public participation report – with all public comments

 ⌊Loader⌉ Loading...

 ⌊EAD Logo⌉ Taking too long?

 ⌊Reload⌉ Reload document

 | [ ⌊Open⌉ Open in new tab ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/27151328/CRL-Commission-public-participation-report.pdf)

[Download [10.98 MB] ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/27151328/CRL-Commission-public-participation-report.pdf)

If you see value in what we do, please chip in – even a small amount helps tremendously.

[ click here to chip in](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/thankyou/)

[Constitutionality](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/#1738150189952-44103674-e29d1034-9c07)

**It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL**

    - Violates Section 15: freedom of religion and conscience.
    - Violates Section 18: freedom of association (including the right not to join
      a state-approved body).
    - Violates Section 31: right of religious communities to self-govern.
    - Forces religious leaders into state-controlled “Umbrella” structures.

[Necessity](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/#1738150189975-5d0623dc-47dc1034-9c07)

**It is UNNECESSARY**

    - South Africa already has robust laws (Criminal Law, SORMA, Children’s Act 
      etc.) that cover all criminal abuses.
    - The issue is not the absence of law—it is poor enforcement of the law.
    - Religious freedom has never been a defence to excuse criminal behaviour.

[Workability](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/#1738150854013-bb98f5fb-7d091034-9c07)

**It is UNWORKABLE**

    - Who decides who qualifies as a “religious practitioner” or can register a 
      religious organisation?
    - Which doctrine will be “official”? Who sets the standard?
    - How will licensing be enforced? What if you disagree with the Peer Review 
      Committee?

[Affordability](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/#1738151172108-10076802-4d001034-9c07)

**It is UNAFFORDABLE**

    - Estimated cost to taxpayers: R750 million start-up + R250 million annually.
    - CRL’s current annual budget is one-fifth of what this scheme would require.
    - Who do you think will pay the license fees for “approved” religious organisations
      and religious practitioners?

[ Have your say on the regulation of religion](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/)

Full Presentation – CRL and State Regulation of Religion

 ⌊Loader⌉ Loading...

 ⌊EAD Logo⌉ Taking too long?

 ⌊Reload⌉ Reload document

 | [ ⌊Open⌉ Open in new tab ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06113130/6889bdfa28c63da5517824a7_CRL-and-State-Regulation-of-Religion-Full-Presentation-1.pdf)

[Download [1.02 MB] ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06113130/6889bdfa28c63da5517824a7_CRL-and-State-Regulation-of-Religion-Full-Presentation-1.pdf)

CRL State Regulation One-Pager

 ⌊Loader⌉ Loading...

 ⌊EAD Logo⌉ Taking too long?

 ⌊Reload⌉ Reload document

 | [ ⌊Open⌉ Open in new tab ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06114443/688344ae0717612b3214bd62_CRL-State-Regulation-One-Pager-2.pdf)

[Download [3.97 MB] ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06114443/688344ae0717612b3214bd62_CRL-State-Regulation-One-Pager-2.pdf)

Alternative Solutions to State Regulation of Religion

 ⌊Loader⌉ Loading...

 ⌊EAD Logo⌉ Taking too long?

 ⌊Reload⌉ Reload document

 | [ ⌊Open⌉ Open in new tab ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06114812/6883497902c6b3691730872e_Alternative-Solutions-to-State-Regulation-of-Religion.pdf)

[Download [3.89 MB] ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06114812/6883497902c6b3691730872e_Alternative-Solutions-to-State-Regulation-of-Religion.pdf)

Summary of Issues and Concerns

 ⌊Loader⌉ Loading...

 ⌊EAD Logo⌉ Taking too long?

 ⌊Reload⌉ Reload document

 | [ ⌊Open⌉ Open in new tab ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06115106/688344a3d124d1e14ae71649_Summary-of-issues-and-concerns.pdf)

[Download [3.86 MB] ](https://cdn.dearsouthafrica.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/06115106/688344a3d124d1e14ae71649_Summary-of-issues-and-concerns.pdf)

### In the News

    - JoyNews — [Despite assurances, legislated “self-regulation” is state control by another name](https://joynews.co.za/despite-assurances-legislated-self-regulation-is-state-control-by-another-name/)
    - IOL — [Backlash against CRL Commission’s new oversight committee for religious groups](https://iol.co.za/mercury/2025-10-05-backlash-against-crl-commissions-new-oversight-committee-for-religious-groups/)
    - Christian Daily — [New committee seeking to ‘preserve dignity and maintain order’ renews debate on religious regulation in South Africa](https://www.christiandaily.com/news/new-independent-committee-renews-debate-on-religious-regulation-in-south-africa)
    - TimesLive — [State regulation of religion not the way to go: Freedom of Religion SA](https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2025-03-03-state-regulation-of-religion-not-the-way-to-go-freedom-of-religion-sa/)
    - Saturday Star — [Church leaders fight back against government control plans](https://thestar.co.za/saturday-star/news/2025-03-03-church-leaders-fight-back-against-government-control-plans/)
    - Central News — [CRL Rights Commission Launches Section 22 Ad Hoc Committee at Rhema Bible Church to Tackle Religious Sector Abuses and Draft Regulatory Framework](https://centralnews.co.za/crl-rights-commission-launches-section-22-ad-hoc-committee-at-rhema-bible-church-to-tackle-religious-sector-abuses-and-draft-regulatory-framework/)

The Chair of the CRL Rights Commission, Ms Thoko Mkhwanazi-Xaluva, announced that
she is forming a committee to push legislation through Parliament to implement a
system for the State to regulate religion.

In this segment from the FOR SA Virtual Roadshow, we delve into the landmark Beloftebos
case—an ongoing legal battle with profound implications for religious freedom in
South Africa. The case centres on Andries and Coia De Villiers, Christian owners
of a wedding venue who respectfully declined to host a same-sex wedding based on
their sincere religious convictions. What followed was an eight-year ordeal initiated
by the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), marked by delays, mounting
legal costs, and significant personal and community losses. At stake is not only
the future of Beloftebos but the broader question of whether South Africans are 
free to live out their beliefs in the public square. This video unpacks the legal,
social, and moral dimensions of the case, highlighting why it matters for people
of all faiths who value freedom of conscience.

### STATEMENTS AND MEDIA RELEASES

Click on a logo to view.

Want to display your organisation’s statement? [Click here. ](https://dearsouthafrica.co.za/regulation-of-religion/summary/ rhino@dearsouthafrica.co.za?subject=org info for Conservation info page)

Close

### Freedom of Religion SA (FOR SA)

 TEMPLATE PROVIDED BY FOR SA

### I strongly oppose the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill [B9B – 2018], which I believe to be unconstitutional and unnecessary, for the following reasons:

 1. The Bill violates our constitutional rights as religious persons to express our
    religious beliefs without fear of punishment or persecution (section 15, read with
    section 16). Increasingly, around the world but also in South Africa, various holy
    scriptures (particularly on contentious issues) are regarded as “politically incorrect”
    or “offensive”, allegedly causing emotional and/or social harm.
 2. I specifically oppose the Bill’s:
 3.  a. wide definition of “harm” (in Clause 1);
     b. the failure to define “hatred” (in Clause 1); and
     c. definition of, and creation of, the crime of “hate speech” (in Clause 4).
 4. The creation of the crime of “hate speech” for saying / distributing something 
    which could possibly be construed as “harmful”, will have certain unintended consequences,
    namely the criminalisation of good / well-meaning people who will be prosecuted
    for saying what they sincerely believe (according to their holy texts) and sent
    to jail.
 5. There are already sufficient existing laws dealing with “hate speech”.
 6. For all of the reasons given, I ask:
 7.  a. For the scrapping of the “hate speech” sections from the Bill altogether;
     b. Alternatively, should the “hate speech” provisions remain part of the Bill, we
        ask:
     c.  a. That “harm” be defined as: “gross emotional and psychological detriment that 
            objectively and severely undermines the human dignity of the targeted group”;
            and
         b. That “hatred” be defined as: “strong and deeply-felt emotions of enmity, ill-
            will, detestation, malevolence and vilification against members of an identifiable
            group, that implies that members of that group are to be despised, scorned, denied
            respect and subjected to ill-treatment based on their group affiliation”.
     d. That Clause 4(2)(d) (the “religious exemption clause”) be strengthened as follows
        to protect:
         _“expression of any religious conviction, tenet, belief, teaching,
        doctrine or writings, by a religious organisation or an individual, in public 
        or in private, to the extent that such expression does not actively support, instigate,
        exhort, or call for extreme detestation, vilification, enmity, ill-will and malevolence
        that constitutes incitement to cause gross emotional and psychological harm that
        severely undermines the dignity of the targeted group, based on race, ethnicity,
        gender, religion or sexual orientation”._