SACD slams CRL Commission's ethics council for Christian organisations

The South African Church Defenders (SACD) has rejected the Cultural, Religious and Language (CRL) Commission’s recent announcement to establish a Section 22 Ad Hoc Committee aimed at regulating religious behaviour specifically within the Christian sector.

This initiative was unveiled last week during a press briefing, wherein the CRL Commission introduced a draft framework to create an Independent Christian Practice Council for Ethics and Accountability.

The newly proposed council aims to establish a comprehensive framework that promotes ethics and accountability among diverse Christian organisations across South Africa.

It comprises representatives from various religious entities, including the Council of African Independent Churches (CAIC), different Nazareth Baptist Churches, the Moral Regeneration Movement, and the South African Council of Churches. This Section 22 Ad Hoc Committee is expected to lead broad consultations and dialogues aimed at forming mechanisms that ensure ethical practices within the Christian community.

Reverend Dr John Maloma, who is pivotal in this initiative, highlighted the importance of the council, asserting that it would help foster a structured environment for churches.

“The framework requires the creation of an independent Christian Practitioners Council for Ethics and Accountability, composed of democratically elected and respected leaders and experts from across our diverse communities. This council will support, guide, and certify organisations that commit to these standards,” he stated enthusiastically.

However, the response from the SACD, led by Pastor Mpfariseni Mukhuba, was swift and unequivocal.

Mukhuba articulated concerns over the necessity of such a committee, arguing that the church has already taken steps to rectify issues of misconduct without external regulations.

“We, as the SACD, are rejecting this framework proposed by the CRL Commission. We are saying no to any attempt to regulate the church. We do not support this, and we vehemently oppose it. The process that was followed, we are saying, is unlawful, and this framework is not needed and is not necessary,” she asserted firmly.

Echoing her sentiments, Mukhuba emphasised that South African laws already exist to address illicit and unethical practices, which could be adapted to better serve the church community.

“We have other laws and regulations. In South Africa, we have enough laws that deal with criminal activities and all the things that are supposed to be covered, which are criminality, financial misconduct, and illegal migration, which are covered by existing laws,” she concluded.

The debate ignited by this proposed council underscores ongoing tensions between regulation and independence within the religious community, raising questions about the future oversight of religious practices in South Africa.