Dear Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services,

Our organisation Liberty Fighters Network (LFN) has been at the forefront of advocating the reformation of our South African legal system to make it more accesible to all.

We have numerous cases where the High Court had been abusing its right to self-regulate its processes by sometimes allowing a persona ficta like a company or association to be represented by an official of it and sometimes not in occasions where such an entity can't afford or otherwise obtain the services of a trusted legal practitioner.

There is absolutely no continuity in allowing such representation by an official in the High Court like it is allowed already in terms of the automatic right of representation via Rule 52 of the Magistrates Court Rules.

We have been part of cases where the High Court simply refused representation by an official resulting in the case against such entity to be adjudicated against it because of nonappearance we belief constitutes a total abuse of process.

The main argument of the High Court why representation by an official could be refused, is its claim that such an official could do more harm than good, but isn't the total nonappearance of such entity actually more harmful than being represented by a layperson instead?

That argument also doesn't make sense in view that the Magistrates Court already allows such representation irrespective of whether such official is competent or not leaving us to believe that the High Court is effectively trying to restrict access to the Courts to indigent entrepreneurs or non profit associations forcing everyone to utilise a legal practitioner or be barred from the High Court in toto.

That further brings us to the other similar problem of representation of a group through a non legal practitioner representative.

Especially in eviction matters, one would find that a group of occupiers were represented by a person of their choice or tenants association at the Rental Housing Tribunal, but once the matter is escalated to a Court the same group of occupiers are forced to get the assistance of a legal practitioner or represent themselves where informal representation similar like as allowed in the Equality Court ought to have been allowed in circumstances basic human rights stand to be violated through the granting of an eviction order.

We are of the view that the legal profession will always have its spot in our society where indigent people in any event would not have been able to afford one or many times simply don't trust lawyers. To allow these informal legal representation will bring more good than harm and ensure that everyone has equal protection of the law and access to Courts and not only that small group which is able to afford the expensive cost of legal practitioners.

These informal representatives should obviously not charge any remuneration or expect payment in contravention of the Legal Practice Act, but that will obviously be monitored by the LPC.

These corrections in the rules of both the Magistrates Court and High Court are long overdue and its absence has already caused injustices to thousands of people over the years and require your urgent attention.

LFN can be contacted for further information on 0781745878 or emailed on reyno@libertyfighters.co.za.