The purpose of the G=Financial Institutions )protections of Funds) Act is to provide for, and consolidate the laws relating to, the investment, safe custody and administration of funds and trust property by financial institutions; to enable the registrar to protect such funds and trust property; to repeal the Financial Institutions (Investment of Funds) Act, 1984 (Act No. 39 of 1984); to improve the enforcement powers of the registrar; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.
Duties of persons dealing with funds of, and with trust property controlled by, financial institutions
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who invests, holds, keeps in safe custody, controls, administers or alienates any funds of the financial institution or any trust property-
(a) must, with regard to such funds, observe the utmost good faith and exercise proper care and diligence;
(b) must, with regard to the trust property and the terms of the instrument or agreement by which the trust or agency in question has been created, observe the utmost good faith and exercise the care and diligence required of a trustee in the exercise or discharge of his or her powers and duties; and
(c) may not alienate, invest, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise encumber or make use of the funds or trust property or furnish any guarantee in a manner calculated to gain directly or indirectly any improper advantage for himself or herself or for any other person to the prejudice of the financial institution or principal concerned.
Declaration of interest
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who takes part in a decision to invest any of the funds of the financial institution or any trust property in a company or other undertaking in which he or she has a direct or indirect financial interest, must declare that interest in writing to the board of management or other governing body of the financial institution or nominee company, indicating the nature and extent of such interest, before such decision is made.
Enforcement
The registrar may, on good cause shown, apply to a division of the High Court having jurisdiction for the appointment of a curator to take control of, and to manage the whole or any part of, the business of an institution.
Source: SABINET
Friday, November 23, 2001
Tuesday, November 20, 2001
South Africa: Stop Court Fight on AIDS Drugs
Appealing to his history of leadership in the country’s struggle for rights and freedoms, Human Rights Watch today urged President Thabo Mbeki to have his government drop its fight against a legal appeal for low-cost AIDS treatment for pregnant women.
The South African government is currently in court fighting a case brought by the Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa to ensure HIV-positive women have access to affordable antiretroviral treatment to reduce the risk of transmission of HIV to their newborns. A hearing in the case is scheduled for November 26 in the Pretoria High Court. President Mbeki has at various times denied that the human immunodeficiency virus is the cause of AIDS and has alleged dangers of anti-AIDS drugs that are unproven in clinical science.
“Mbeki should pull the government out of this case and support programs to help newborns start life free of HIV,” said Peter Takirambudde, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division. “Even in much lower-income African countries, women increasingly have access to this treatment.”
South Africa has the largest number of persons living with HIV/AIDS of any country, about 4.2 million, according to United Nations figures. The Medical Research Council of South Africa recently estimated that 7 million persons could die of HIV/AIDS by 2010, mostly young adults in their prime. Although South Africa has resources to provide treatment to a significant number of AIDS sufferers, the government has consistently resisted supporting treatment programs.
In April 2001, South Africa won a victory against 39 pharmaceutical companies that had sued the government because of the provisions of a 1997 law that would have facilitated the production and importation of generic drugs for HIV/AIDS. The opportunity for treatment programs that was created when the companies dropped their suit in the face of national and international pressure has been left unused by the government, which does not fund treatment programs on a significant level.
“President Mbeki could go a long way to redeeming his mishandling of AIDS by supporting the treatment for mother-to-child transmission,” said Takirambudde.
Human Rights Watch urged President Mbeki to lead the government in increasing budgetary support for HIV/AIDS programs – currently allocated less than 1 percent of the national budget – and in working with the medical and public health leaders in South Africa who are already mobilized to strengthen both prevention and treatment programs.
“President Mbeki’s questioning of the science of HIV/AIDS and the South African government’s active refusal to support programs of known effectiveness is helping to fuel the AIDS crisis in South Africa,” said Takirambudde. “This is much worse than the government inaction we have seen so often regarding HIV/AIDS.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
The South African government is currently in court fighting a case brought by the Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa to ensure HIV-positive women have access to affordable antiretroviral treatment to reduce the risk of transmission of HIV to their newborns. A hearing in the case is scheduled for November 26 in the Pretoria High Court. President Mbeki has at various times denied that the human immunodeficiency virus is the cause of AIDS and has alleged dangers of anti-AIDS drugs that are unproven in clinical science.
“Mbeki should pull the government out of this case and support programs to help newborns start life free of HIV,” said Peter Takirambudde, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division. “Even in much lower-income African countries, women increasingly have access to this treatment.”
South Africa has the largest number of persons living with HIV/AIDS of any country, about 4.2 million, according to United Nations figures. The Medical Research Council of South Africa recently estimated that 7 million persons could die of HIV/AIDS by 2010, mostly young adults in their prime. Although South Africa has resources to provide treatment to a significant number of AIDS sufferers, the government has consistently resisted supporting treatment programs.
In April 2001, South Africa won a victory against 39 pharmaceutical companies that had sued the government because of the provisions of a 1997 law that would have facilitated the production and importation of generic drugs for HIV/AIDS. The opportunity for treatment programs that was created when the companies dropped their suit in the face of national and international pressure has been left unused by the government, which does not fund treatment programs on a significant level.
“President Mbeki could go a long way to redeeming his mishandling of AIDS by supporting the treatment for mother-to-child transmission,” said Takirambudde.
Human Rights Watch urged President Mbeki to lead the government in increasing budgetary support for HIV/AIDS programs – currently allocated less than 1 percent of the national budget – and in working with the medical and public health leaders in South Africa who are already mobilized to strengthen both prevention and treatment programs.
“President Mbeki’s questioning of the science of HIV/AIDS and the South African government’s active refusal to support programs of known effectiveness is helping to fuel the AIDS crisis in South Africa,” said Takirambudde. “This is much worse than the government inaction we have seen so often regarding HIV/AIDS.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
Thursday, November 1, 2001
Masetlha 'above the law'
Home Affairs DG Billy Masetlha seems to have placed himself above the law resulting in a major setback for democracy in South Africa, the department's minister Mangosuthu Buthelezi said on Thursday. Replying to questions in the National Assembly, Buthelezi said by working without a valid contract, Masetlha had placed the legality of all actions taken by the department in jeopardy. "It is possible that Mr Masetlha is placing himself above the rule of law and creating the invalidity of an enormous amount of actions taken by my department with unforseeable consequences for the state. It was also an enormous setback for our democracy as it seems that certain people are becoming untouchable and beyond the reach of law."
The support Masetlha was receiving from "many sectors" was effectively placing him beyond the reach of the law. Buthelezi said he, as the political head of the department, was therefore not able to perform his Constitutionally mandated function of being accountable to Parliament. Relations between the minister and the DG have been strained for months and Buthelezi has claimed - backed by legal opinion of senior counsel - that Masetlha had not had a valid employment contract since June this year. The minister told MPs on Thursday that "no conclusions were reached" at a meeting earlier this week between himself, President Thabo Mbeki and Deputy President Jacob Zuma. Contrary to statements issued by the Presidency, the meeting was not convened to deal solely with the Masetlha issue. "The impression I got from the Deputy President was that it was a meeting that we have, the three of us, from time to time. At this meeting this issue, among other things, was raised but no conclusions were reached on that," he said.
Both Buthelezi - the Inkatha Freedom Party leader - and Masetlha, a former ANC intelligence operative, have previously asked for Mbeki's intervention. Buthelezi said he had referred all information and documentation on Masetlha's contract to the Public Service Commission following a recommendation by Parliament's home affairs portfolio committee. The commission was investigating the matter, but ultimately the final decision of the DG's status rested with the President. The minister said he had only agreed to Mbeki's request that Masetlha's contract be extended on condition that the situation was reviewed when the President returned from an overseas trip. He had, at that time, communicated this to Masetlha and the Cabinet.
Buthelezi last week presented a 10-page document citing 64 examples of alleged wrongdoing by Masetlha to the home affairs committee. He accused the director-general of insubordination and defiance. Masetlha said in response that he was angry and disappointed by the accusations, which he contended were part of a campaign to vilify him.
Source: mail & Guardian
The support Masetlha was receiving from "many sectors" was effectively placing him beyond the reach of the law. Buthelezi said he, as the political head of the department, was therefore not able to perform his Constitutionally mandated function of being accountable to Parliament. Relations between the minister and the DG have been strained for months and Buthelezi has claimed - backed by legal opinion of senior counsel - that Masetlha had not had a valid employment contract since June this year. The minister told MPs on Thursday that "no conclusions were reached" at a meeting earlier this week between himself, President Thabo Mbeki and Deputy President Jacob Zuma. Contrary to statements issued by the Presidency, the meeting was not convened to deal solely with the Masetlha issue. "The impression I got from the Deputy President was that it was a meeting that we have, the three of us, from time to time. At this meeting this issue, among other things, was raised but no conclusions were reached on that," he said.
Both Buthelezi - the Inkatha Freedom Party leader - and Masetlha, a former ANC intelligence operative, have previously asked for Mbeki's intervention. Buthelezi said he had referred all information and documentation on Masetlha's contract to the Public Service Commission following a recommendation by Parliament's home affairs portfolio committee. The commission was investigating the matter, but ultimately the final decision of the DG's status rested with the President. The minister said he had only agreed to Mbeki's request that Masetlha's contract be extended on condition that the situation was reviewed when the President returned from an overseas trip. He had, at that time, communicated this to Masetlha and the Cabinet.
Buthelezi last week presented a 10-page document citing 64 examples of alleged wrongdoing by Masetlha to the home affairs committee. He accused the director-general of insubordination and defiance. Masetlha said in response that he was angry and disappointed by the accusations, which he contended were part of a campaign to vilify him.
Source: mail & Guardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)