<div>Judges grill Treasury on SRD grant</div><div></div>
SCA judge questions whether “people without the means to even buy a cellphone” should have to apply online
The government has cautioned that expanding the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant as mandated by a court could cost taxpayers up to R139-billion annually. On Tuesday, the Department of Social Development (DSD), SASSA, and National Treasury appeared before the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) to defend the grant's regulations. The case stemmed from a January 2025 Gauteng High Court ruling by Judge Leonard Twala, who found certain regulations governing the R370-a-month grant unconstitutional and invalid.
The Institute for Economic Justice and #PayTheGrants challenged the regulations, contending they excluded millions of potentially eligible individuals.
Judge Twala sided with the challengers, ruling the government must allow in-person applications and progressively increase the grant and raise the income threshold in line with the cost of living. The SRD grant, introduced in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, currently serves about 8.5-million people meeting eligibility criteria, including an income threshold of R624 a month. SASSA conducts monthly bank account checks to determine ongoing eligibility.
Advocate Gilbert Marcus for National Treasury told the SCA that the case highlighted a fundamental disagreement over how socio-economic rights "should be realized." While Treasury desired to widen the net of social assistance, fiscal constraints prevented further expansion, he argued. The high court's directives on spending government funds lacked proper assessment of Treasury's constraints, Marcus claimed.
He also defended the use of bank and database checks to prevent fraud and wasteful expenditure, acknowledging that no system is perfect.
The judges questioned whether these compromises unfairly affected vulnerable applicants. Judge Pieter Meyer raised concerns about people without cellphone access, while Judge Wendy Hughes queried whether the government had adequately accommodated those lacking online access since the COVID-19 lockdown. Marcus responded that the government had introduced self-help kiosks, email assistance, and community outreach programs, acknowledging the system's reliance on online processing due to scale and efficiency concerns.
Advocate Herman van Eeden for DSD and SASSA defended the online system as the only practical way to process applications. He also supported the monthly bank and database checks, stating that the SRD is temporary relief awarded on a month-to-month basis. Advocate Jason Brickhill for SERI challenged the government's case, citing DSD proposals from 2023 showing potential increases in grant value and income threshold.
He argued that Treasury had exaggerated the costs of expansion, emphasizing that incremental increases closer to inflation should be sought.
Written by urgent.news from GroundUp's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
