Welkom: Residents of the Greater Lejweleputswa District Municipality in the Free State have called for stricter measures to ascertain the authenticity of marriages between foreign nationals and South Africans. The call was made during the second of three public hearings on the Marriage Bill [B43-2023], held by the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs at the Toronto Recreation Centre in Welkom.

According to South African Government News Agency, participants at the hearing expressed concern over an increase in marriages of convenience, which they argue expose the national register to fraudulent entries. The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs reported that attendees urged for a clear process within the bill to ensure that marriages are entered into for legitimate reasons.

The issue of fraudulent marriages has been a recurring theme in public hearings across various provinces, leading the committee to request the Department of Home Affairs to investigate these claims thoroughly.

The Marriage Bill aims to consolidate and simplify the current marriage laws into a single statute that would replace the existing laws governing civil marriages, customary marriages, and civil unions. The bill’s main goals include recognizing all forms of marriage, providing legal protection for marriages concluded before the bill’s enactment, and prohibiting child marriages in alignment with international human rights standards.

The bill stipulates that both spouses must be at least 18 years old and introduces penalties for marrying or facilitating marriages with minors. It also empowers the Minister of Home Affairs to appoint marriage officers from various sectors of society, including traditional leadership.

Some participants voiced concerns that the bill might infringe on constitutional rights by unifying different marriage laws, potentially limiting individual choice. Opinions were divided on the topic of polygamy; some attendees supported its recognition due to its cultural significance, while others highlighted potential conflicts, particularly regarding property rights.

The committee noted troubling attitudes towards same-sex marriages, emphasizing the need to respect constitutional rights and protect individual choices. Participants also debated the appropriate legal age for marriage, with some advocating for the current threshold of 18 years, while others argued for a higher age to ensure maturity and educational completion.

Concerns were also raised about protecting marriage officers who refuse to solemnize marriages conflicting with their beliefs, and calls were made for the Department of Home Affairs to develop a training plan for new marriage officers under the bill’s framework.

The hearings have revealed deep-seated differences in opinion on the bill’s provisions, with some advocating for the prohibition of polygamous marriages due to sustainability issues, while others call for equitable rights for all parties involved. Faith-based organizations expressed contradictions with their religious beliefs regarding same-sex marriages, although supporters of these unions cited constitutional rights to endorse their recognition within the bill.