There seems to be a lot of confusion going around in as far as our court application which was launched on 4 May 2020.

The application was split into 2 parts.

Part A dealt with the issues around urgency, the right to manufacture and export, and our request for minutes of all National Coronavirus Command Council (NCCC) meetings which led to votes or decisions relating to the sale of cigarettes, as well as the record of the decision which led to the promulgation of regulation 27 of the current lockdown regulations which prohibits the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products. This was to be heard in the Gauteng Division of the High Court held at Pretoria today 12 May 2020.

On the morning of Thursday 7 May 2020 The President and the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (The Respondents) filed their Notice of Intention to oppose our aforementioned court application.

Also on Thursday 7 May 2020 the Respondents, via the Office of the State Attorney, wrote to our attorneys and confirmed that manufacturing and exporting of amongst other things cigarettes was permitted in terms of the current regulations. This was after we had addressed numerous letters to them requesting confirmation on this issue so our members could commence manufacturing, with them merely replying that this request was being considered. Our members did not wish to take the risk, given the powers available to the state, despite our interpretation and firm view that the regulations permitted manufacturing and exporting albeit with limitations attached thereto. This situation was only clarified some 3 days after the service of our court papers on the Respondents.

On Friday 8 May 2020 the Respondents filed their answering affidavit in reply to our court application.

In the papers they confirmed the content of their letter of 7 May 2020 wherein they confirmed that the regulations permitted our members to manufacture and export.

It can also be seen from the papers filed by the Respondents that the NCCC does not vote on matters and certainly did not vote on the issues relating to, amongst other things, the change of stance ultimately leading to the insertion of section 27 in the latest regulations under the Disaster Management Act during the relevant meetings relating thereto, and no votes were taken at any such meetings and therefore, there are no minutes of any meetings where any vote was taken in relation to the subject matter of FITA’s court application, or possibly at all

The Respondents further argue in their papers that the minutes of NCCC meetings before the lockdown regulations were made, and before the President’s address have no relevance to the decision to promulgate regulation 27 of the lockdown regulations.

The Respondents further agree to provide us with the record of decision and the reasons for the promulgation of regulation 27 of the level 4 regulations as soon as reasonably possible.

The Respondents in their answering affidavit then agree with us on the issue that costs of part A of our application be reserved for determination in part B of the application.

On the basis of the above concessions from the Respondents, there was nothing left to argue in as far as Part A was concerned, which part was to be heard today 12 May 2020.

The matter was in any event in court today 12 May 2020 but this was merely for purposes of making an order of court what had in essence now been agreed by the parties in light of the concessions made by the Respondents in relation to the relief sought in Part A of our papers.

In light of the above, we are now turning our focus to the relief sought in part B of our application, including confirmation by a court of law that the sale of tobacco products and cigarettes is lawful under the lockdown regulations.

In an effort to expedite the hearing of this matter, the respective legal representatives of both parties are currently working on a timetable to have part B of our court application heard as soon as reasonably possible. Clarity on this will be given in due course. The public at large must be mindful of the fact that a number of documents need to be exchanged prior to the matter being ventilated in court.

It must also be noted that Part B cannot be heard before Part A as part of the relief sought in Part A is the minutes of all the meetings leading to the decisions made by the NCCC relating to the ban on the sale of cigarettes. Further relief was also sought in Part A relating to the record of the decision which led to the promulgation of Regulation 27 of the current lockdown regulations which bans the sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products.

We cannot unfortunately therefore argue Part B without these documents (if they are indeed available), as we need to refer to them in order to show that the Respondents’ decision to promulgate Regulation 27 of the current regulations is amongst other things irrational.

We understand that many of our supporters have been left frustrated by the delays in getting this matter finalized however this is the nature of the legal system.

The delays by government in amongst other things not getting the record of decision, which we submit should be readily available, to us as a matter of urgency also do not help in as far as the speedy finalization of this matter.

We have full confidence in our legal system, and we are of the view that once this matter is properly ventilated, a just outcome will result. We will therefore relentlessly pursue part B of our Application.

We wish to again thank the many South Africans who have wished us well and continue to support our cause.