Available in Russian
Author: Elena Sorokina
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2025-3-107-125
Keywords: socio-economic rights; remedies; meaningful engagement; Constitutional Court; South Africa
South Africa’s 1996 Constitution is renowned for its inclusion of an expansive range of justiciable socio-economic rights. The South African Constitutional Court has taken different approaches in the way it reasons its decisions and constantly tries to find appropriate ways of giving effective remedies in cases of socio-economic rights claims. The early years of scholarship on socio-economic rights in South Africa were primarily devoted to the merits and demerits of the Court’s approach. The focus has been the Court’s approach to the interpretation of socio-economic rights, particularly the reasonableness standard of review for the positive obligations imposed upon government by these rights. However, the Constitutional Court has developed an innovative practice called meaningful engagement in cases relating to evictions and the right to access adequate housing. This approach recognizes that there is a variety of legitimate ways to ensure and implement socio-economic rights, and also promotes the participation of both government authorities and communities, as well as individual citizens, in the resolving of cases concerning violations of these rights. Rather than impose a decision on the parties, the Constitutional Court directs the parties to engage together in a process to ensure that they themselves, as a result of dialogue, reach a settlement that would lead to a more optimal outcome for both sides, and also to ensure the implementation of socio-economic rights. The meaningful engagement allows persons whose rights have been violated to take part in the process of making state decisions concerning their rights. The deliberations that take place as part of meaningful engagement play a key role in identifying existing problems and circumstances of the case concerning violations of socio-economic rights, which contributes to making more substantiated judicial decisions and also allows to resolve the issues of legitimacy of the Constitutional Court’s decisions and its institutional competence. Overall, the practice of the Constitutional Court illustrates the significance of the participatory and deliberative democracy principles in resolving disputes over violations of constitutional rights. The article examines the emergence of the requirement for meaningful engagement, analyses the case law of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, and considers the benefits and disadvantages of this requirement.
About the author: Elena Sorokina – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Research Fellow of the Human Rights Department, Institute of State and Law, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Citation:
Sorokina E. (2025) Konstruktivnoe vzaimodeystvie kak sredstvo zashchity sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh prav v Yuzhno-Afrikanskoy Respublike [Meaningful engagement as a remedy for socio-economic rights in South Africa]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.34, no.3, pp.107–125. (In Russian).
References
Bilchitz D. (2023) Does History Make a Difference? The Role of History in the Interpretation of Socio-Economic Rights in South Africa. In: Bilchitz D., Cachalia R. (eds.) Transitional Justice, Distributive Justice, and Transformative Constitutionalism: Comparing Colombia and South Africa, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.196–215.
Brand D. (2011) Judicial Deference and Democracy in Socio-Economic Rights Cases in South Africa. Stellenbosch Law Review, vol.22, no.3, pp.614–638.
Chenwi L. (2009) A New Approach to Remedies in Socio-Economic Rights Adjudication: Occupiers of 541 Olivia Road and Others v. City of Johannesburg and Others. Constitutional Court Review, vol.2, pp.371–393.
Chenwi L. (2011) “Meaningful Engagement” in the Realisation of Socio-Economic Rights: The South African Experience. Southern African Public Law, vol.26, no.1, pp.128–156.
Chenwi L., Tissington K. (2010) Engaging Meaningfully with Government on Socio-Economic Rights: A Focus on the Right to Housing, Cape Town: Community Law Centre.
Cherkasov A. (2021) Partisipativnaya demokratiya i eyo formy na mestnom urovne v evropeyskikh stranakh [Participatory democracy and its forms at the local level in European countries]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.30, no.6, pp.15–33. (In Russian).
Christiansen E.C. (2007) Adjudicating Non-Justiciable Rights: Socio-Economic Rights and the South African Constitutional Court. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, vol.38, no.2, pp.321–386.
Dixon R. (2007) Creating Dialogue about Socioeconomic Rights: Strong-Form versus Weak-Form Judicial Review Revisited. International Journal of Constitutional Law, vol.5, no.3, pp.391–418.
Fuo O.N. (2013) Constitutional Basis for the Enforcement of “Executive” Policies that Give Effect to Socio-Economic Rights in South Africa. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, vol.16, no.4, pp.1–45.
Harel A., Shinar A. (2018) The Real Case for Judicial Review. In: Delaney E.F., Dixon R. (eds.) Comparative Judicial Review, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.13–35.
Hepple B. (2012) Negotiating Social Change in the Shadow of the Law. South African Law Journal, vol.129, no.2, pp.248–273.
Isokpan A., Durojaye E. (2019) Eviction Process in Nigeria: The Need for Meaningful Engagement. Commonwealth Law Bulletin, vol.44, no.1, pp.3–25.
Klatt P. (2021) Positive Rights: Who Decides? Judicial Review in Balance. In: Sieckmann J.-R. (ed.) Proportionality, Balancing, and Rights: Robert Alexy’s Theory of Constitutional Rights, Cham: Springer, pp.163–196.
Kolotova N.V. (2024) Standarty dostoynogo urovnya zhizni: sovremennye podhody i sudebnaya praktika [The right to a decent standard of living: modern doctrine and judicial practice]. Zakon, no.12, pp.17–29. (In Russian).
Kravets I. (2025) Institut assambley grazhdan, Cabildo Abierto i deliberativnoe uchastie v sovremennykh gosudarstvakh [The institution of citizens’ assemblies, Cabildo Abierto and deliberative participation in modern states]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.34, no.1, pp.37–61. (In Russian).
Langa P. (2011) The Role of the Constitution in the Struggle against Poverty. Stellenbosch Law Review, vol.22, no.3, pp.446–451.
Lazarus L., Simonsen N. (2015) Judicial Review and Parliamentary Debate: Enriching the Doctrine of Due Deference. In: Hunt M., Hooper H.J., Yowell P. (eds.) Parliaments and Human Rights: Redressing the Democratic Deficit, Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp.385–404.
Liebenberg S. (2001) The Right to Social Assistance: The Implications of Grootboom for Policy Reform in South Africa. South African Journal on Human Rights, vol.17, no.2, pp.232–257.
Liebenberg S. (2012) Engaging the Paradoxes of the Universal and Particular in Human Rights Adjudication: The Possibilities and Pitfalls of “Meaningful Engagement”. African Human Rights Law Journal, vol.12, no.1, pp.1–29.
Liebenberg S. (2014) Participatory Approaches to Socio-Economic Rights Adjudication: Tentative Lessons from South African Evictions Law. Nordic Journal on Human Rights, vol.32, no.4, pp.312–330.
Liebenberg S. (2015) Social Rights and Transformation in South Africa: Three Frames. South African Journal on Human Rights, vol.31, no.3, pp.446–471.
Liebenberg S. (2019) Participatory Democratic Turn in South Africa’s Social Rights Jurisprudence. In: Young K.G. (ed.) The Future of Economic and Social Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.187–211.
Lucherini F. (2024) The Constitutionalization of Social Rights in Italy, Germany, and Portugal: Legislative Discretion, Minimal Guarantees, and Distributive Integration. German Law Journal, vol.25, no.2, pp.335–350.
Mahomedy S. (2020) Extra-Judicial Engagement in Socio-Economic Rights Realisation: Lessons from #FeesMustFall. South African Journal on Human Rights, vol.36. no.1, pp.49–73.
McLean K. (2010) Meaningful Engagement: One Step Forward or Two Back? Some Thoughts on Joe Slovo. Constitutional Court Review, vol.3, pp.223–242.
Michelman F.I. (2003) The Constitution, Social Rights, and Liberal Political Justification. International Journal of Constitutional Law, vol.1, no.1, pp.13–34.
Mtshiselwa N. (2014) A Post-Apartheid Nation in Chains? Relevance of Lucky Dube’s Mickey Mouse Freedom in Reconfiguring Forms of Oppression in South Africa Today. Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae, vol.40, no.1, pp.57–76.
Muller G. (2011) Conceptualising “Meaningful Engagement” as a Deliberative Democratic Partnership. Stellenbosch Law Review, vol.22, no.3, pp.742–758.
Pardo D.W.A. (2013) Judiciário e políticas públicas ambientais: uma proposta de atuação baseada no “compromisso significativo”. Revista de Direito Ambiental, vol.72, pp.161–210.
Paremoer L., Jung C. (2009) Rol' sotsial'nykh i ekonomicheskikh prav v podderzhke oppozitsii v postaparteidnoy YuAR [Role of social and economic rights in supporting opposition in post-apartheid South Africa]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.18, no.6, pp.126–149. (In Russian).
Pieterse M. (2012) Procedural Relief, Constitutional Citizenship and Socio-Economic Rights as Legitimate Expectations. South African Journal on Human Rights, vol.28, no.3, pp.359–379.
Pieterse М. (2017) Rights-based Litigation, Urban Governance and Social Justice in South Africa: The Right to Joburg, London: Routledge.
Pillay A. (2012) Toward Effective Social and Economic Rights Adjudication: The Role of Meaningful Engagement. International Journal of Constitutional Law, vol.10, no.3, pp.732–755.
Ray B. (2008) Occupiers of 51 Olivia Road v City of Johannesburg: Enforcing the Right to Adequate Housing through Engagement. Human Rights Law Review, vol.8, no.4, pp.703–713.
Ray B. (2016) Engaging with Social Rights: Procedure, Participation and Democracy in South Africa’s Second Wave, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roach K. (2021) Remedies for Human Rights Violations: A Two-Track Approach to Supra-national and National Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sachs A. (2006) Sudebnaya zashchita sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh prav: delo Grutbum [Judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights: the Grootboom case]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.15, no.1, pp.144–153. (In Russian).
Scott J., Sturm S.R. (2006) Courts as Catalysts: Re-Thinking the Judicial Role in New Governance. Columbia Journal of European Law, vol.13, no.3, pp.565–594.
Serafim M.C.G. (2021) Compromisso significativo: contribuições sul-africanas para os processos estruturais no Brasil, Belo Horizonte: Fórum.
Smits J.M. (2017) What is Legal Doctrine? On the Aims and Methods of Legal-Dogmatic Research. In: van Gestel R., Micklitz H.-W., Rubin E.L. (eds.) Rethinking Legal Scholarship: A Transatlantic Dialogue, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.207–228.
Sorokina Е.А. (2024) Innovatsionnye sredstva zashchity social'no-ekonomicheskikh prav v praktike Konstitutsionnogo suda Yuzhno-Afrikanskoy Respubliki [Innovative remedies for the protection of socio-economic rights: The Constitutional Сourt of South Africa jurisprudence]. Zakon, no.12, pp.37–48. (In Russian).
Sunstein C.R. (2000/2001) Social and Economic Rights? Lessons from South Africa. Constitutional Forum, vol.11, no.4, pp.123–132.
Taylor W.K. (2023) The Social Constitution: Embedding Social Rights through Legal Mobilization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tushnet M., Khosla M. (2022) Courts and Effective Governance. In: Jackson V.C., Dawood Y. (eds.) Constitutionalism and a Right to Effective Government? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.124–134.
Van der Berg S. (2013) Meaningful Engagement: Proceduralising Socio-Economic Rights Further or Infusing Administrative Law with Substance? South African Journal on Human Rights, vol.29, no.2, pp.376–398.
Varlamova N.V. (2024) Sotsial'nye prava: yuridiko-dogmaticheskaya interpretatsiya v praktike organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya [Social rights: legal-dogmatic interpretation by the constitutional review bodies]. Pravovedenie, no.4, pp.551–574. (In Russian).
Wilson S., Dugard J. (2014) Constitutional Jurisprudence: The First and Second Waves. In: Langford M., Cousins B., Dugard J., Madlingozi T. (eds.) Socio-Economic Rights in South Africa: Symbols or Substance? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.35–62.
Wójcik M.A. (2024) Toward Addressing Inequality and Social Exclusion by Algorithms: Human-Centric AI through the Lens of Ubuntu. In: Régis C., Denis J.-L., Axente M.L., Kishimoto A. (eds.) Human-Centered AI: A Multidisciplinary Perspective for Policy-Makers, Auditors, and Users, New York: CRC Press, pp.21–33.
Woolman S. (2021) The Selfless Constitution: Experimentalism and Flourishing as Foundations of South Africa’s Basic Law, Makhanda: NISC (Pty) Ltd.
Young K.G. (2022) The New Managerialism: Courts, Positive Duties, and Economic and Social Rights. In: Jackson V.C., Dawood Y. (eds.) Constitutionalism and a Right to Effective Government? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.135–150.