, MSL5902 ASSIGNMENT 2 2026
DUE DATE: 15 AUGUST 2026
QUESTION 1
*LEGAL OPINION ON KHOSA & OTHERS v THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT &
OTHERS; MAHLAULE & OTHERS v THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT & OTHERS
2004 (6) SA 505 (CC)
1. Introduction
The Constitutional Court's decision in Khosa & Others v The Minister of Social Development
& Others; Mahlaule & Others v The Minister of Social Development & Others 2004 (6) SA 505
(CC) is a landmark judgment on the interpretation and enforcement of socio-economic
rights in South Africa. The case concerned whether permanent residents lawfully living in
South Africa could be excluded from receiving social assistance grants solely because they
were not South African citizens. The Court was required to interpret section 27(1)(c) of the
Constitution, which guarantees "everyone" the right of access to social security, together
with the constitutional rights to equality and human dignity.1 In my opinion, the judgment
represents one of the strongest affirmations of South Africa's commitment to constitutional
democracy, as it demonstrates that socio-economic rights are practical and enforceable
rights intended to protect vulnerable members of society rather than merely aspirational
ideals.
2. Background to the Case
1
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ss 9 and 27; Khosa & Others v The Minister of Social
Development & Others; Mahlaule & Others v The Minister of Social Development & Others 2004 (6) SA 505
(CC) paras 40–47.
DUE DATE: 15 AUGUST 2026
QUESTION 1
*LEGAL OPINION ON KHOSA & OTHERS v THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT &
OTHERS; MAHLAULE & OTHERS v THE MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT & OTHERS
2004 (6) SA 505 (CC)
1. Introduction
The Constitutional Court's decision in Khosa & Others v The Minister of Social Development
& Others; Mahlaule & Others v The Minister of Social Development & Others 2004 (6) SA 505
(CC) is a landmark judgment on the interpretation and enforcement of socio-economic
rights in South Africa. The case concerned whether permanent residents lawfully living in
South Africa could be excluded from receiving social assistance grants solely because they
were not South African citizens. The Court was required to interpret section 27(1)(c) of the
Constitution, which guarantees "everyone" the right of access to social security, together
with the constitutional rights to equality and human dignity.1 In my opinion, the judgment
represents one of the strongest affirmations of South Africa's commitment to constitutional
democracy, as it demonstrates that socio-economic rights are practical and enforceable
rights intended to protect vulnerable members of society rather than merely aspirational
ideals.
2. Background to the Case
1
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 ss 9 and 27; Khosa & Others v The Minister of Social
Development & Others; Mahlaule & Others v The Minister of Social Development & Others 2004 (6) SA 505
(CC) paras 40–47.