She says the proposed regulation of churches could criminalise pastors and lead to church closures, warning it may create restrictions similar to those in Rwanda and Angola.

Pastor Mukhuba, speaking at a large march currently underway in Durban organised by the South African Church Defenders (SACD), says the CRL Rights Commission, led by Thoko Mkhwanazi‑Xaluva, is pushing for measures that would regulate how churches operate.

She argues that such legislation could infringe on constitutional rights, including freedom of religion, worship, expression, and association, and said the commission is overstepping its mandate to protect these rights.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post Pastor Mukhuba says Thoko Mkhwanazi-Xaluva should be removed as chairperson of the CRL Rights Commission, arguing she is not impartial and unfit to lead a Chapter 9 institution appeared first on MDNtv.

Speaking at a media briefing, SACD leaders confirmed that they have filed papers in the Gauteng High Court, where they are seeking urgent relief against what they describe as unlawful and unconstitutional actions by the commission.

Legal Challenge Explained

SACD says its court case is not about avoiding accountability or protecting wrongdoing within churches. Instead, the organisation argues that it is acting to defend constitutional democracy, the rule of law, and the fundamental right to freedom of religion.

At the centre of the dispute is a Section 22 Committee established by the CRL Rights Commission. SACD is asking the court to declare that the creation of this committee was unlawful, that all its actions are invalid, and that it must be disbanded.

The organisation is also challenging the CRL’s communication with state security structures, which allegedly labelled charismatic churches as a domestic threat. SACD says this claim is false, reckless, and has caused unnecessary fear and division within religious communities.

Constitutional Rights at Stake

According to SACD, the draft framework violates multiple sections of the Constitution, including protections for freedom of religion, freedom of association, and the collective rights of religious communities.

They argue that churches must be free to worship, teach, discipline, and govern themselves without interference from the state. SACD also raised concerns that the framework breaches the principle of equality by singling out churches for special regulation not imposed on other civil society organisations.

Although the CRL has described the framework as voluntary, SACD says the inclusion of registration requirements, accreditation standards, and a so called seal of good standing creates indirect pressure on churches to comply.

Fears of State Driven Regulation

SACD warned that the framework amounts to state driven regulation of religion through indirect means. They pointed to clauses that propose future legislation to establish a state appointed and state funded body with broad powers over the religious sector.

According to SACD, a Section 22 Committee has no authority to legislate, enforce rules, or regulate churches. Its role is limited to research, consultation, and advice.

The organisation says the draft framework goes far beyond this mandate by attempting to dictate how churches should organise themselves, appoint leaders, manage finances, and govern their internal affairs.

Warning Against Abuse of Power

SACD leaders warned that South Africa must never become a country where the state decides who may hear from God, who may start a church, or how faith should be practised.

They also cited international examples, including Rwanda, Angola, Russia, and China, where increased state control over religion has led to church closures and suffering among believers.

What SACD Is Demanding

SACD says it fully supports the enforcement of criminal law where abuse or corruption occurs, noting that South Africa already has adequate legal mechanisms to deal with crimes such as fraud, assault, and sexual abuse.

However, the organisation rejects any additional regulatory regime imposed specifically on religious communities.

In its court application, SACD is seeking to halt what it describes as unlawful conduct by the CRL Rights Commission and to ensure that religious freedom in South Africa remains real, meaningful, and protected.

The organisation insists that churches must remain free to practise their faith, govern themselves, and operate without state interference.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post SA Church Defenders Take CRL Rights Commission to Court Over Church Regulation Plan appeared first on MDNtv.

At the heart of the discussion is not whether abuse should be addressed. South African law already does that. The real question is whether the framework changes the long-standing boundary between state authority and religious autonomy.

Religious Freedom in the Constitution

South Africa’s Constitution deliberately protects religious freedom through Sections 15 and 31. These provisions guarantee:

 • Freedom of religion, belief, and opinion

 • The right of religious communities to practise and organise their religious affairs

This protection was designed to prevent the state from interfering in belief, worship, doctrine, and internal governance.

Crucially, these freedoms were never intended to shield criminal behaviour. Churches, like all institutions, are subject to criminal and civil law.

What the CRL Framework Introduces

The draft framework proposes:

 • A sector-wide self-regulatory structure

 • Certification or accreditation mechanisms

 • Public seals of good standing

 • Common ethical and governance benchmarks

While the CRL has described the framework as voluntary, its association with a Chapter 9 institution gives it a level of authority that can influence public legitimacy, donor confidence, and engagement with the state.

This is where religious freedom concerns arise.

Why “Voluntary” Does Not Always Mean Neutral

In practice, voluntary frameworks linked to the state can become:

 • Informal gatekeepers of legitimacy

 • Benchmarks for who is considered compliant

 • Tools that pressure participation without formal enforcement

A church that chooses not to participate may not be breaking the law, but it could still be perceived as outside acceptable norms.

For many faith leaders, this creates a chilling effect on religious independence.

Enforcement Versus Oversight

Existing law already allows the state to intervene when harm occurs:

 • Assault and abuse are criminal offences

 • Financial exploitation is prosecuted under fraud statutes

 • Child protection laws apply in all spaces, including churches

What the CRL proposal changes is not enforcement, but oversight of religious governance.

This shift raises an important question: does protecting religious rights include shaping how religions organise themselves?

Why This Matters Beyond the Church

The implications extend beyond Christianity.

If religious governance can be indirectly influenced through certification and compliance frameworks, similar models could be applied to other belief systems.

For constitutional scholars, this raises a red flag. Religious freedom is not simply the right to believe, but the right to practise and organise belief without state endorsement or approval.

A Defining Moment for Church and State

South Africa now stands at a crossroads.

One path strengthens law enforcement and protects victims without altering religious autonomy.

The other introduces oversight mechanisms that blur the line between rights protection and regulation.

How this debate is resolved will shape religious freedom in South Africa for generations.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post What the CRL’s Church Framework Means for Religious Freedom in South Africa appeared first on MDNtv.

The case, filed on 17 November 2025 in the Johannesburg High Court, comes after months of tension between Christian groups and the CRL, following the Commission’s decision to form what it called a “Section 22 Committee.”

According to the SACD, this committee was created illegally and is part of a broader attempt to place churches, doctrines, and religious leadership under state control — something Parliament had previously rejected.

Tensions Reach Breaking Point

The dispute escalated on 2 October 2025, when SACD says the CRL reignited an old regulatory agenda without legal authority or public consultation.

The move sparked outrage among Christian organisations, who accused the CRL of ignoring constitutional limits and acting in defiance of Parliament’s earlier decisions.

Thousands of believers marched from Pretoria to Cape Town on 8 October and again on 13 November, presenting a memorandum to both the President and Parliament.

But SACD says the CRL refused to back down, dismissing calls for restraint and showing “disturbing indifference” to the rights of the Christian community.

A ‘Moment of Truth’ for Religious Freedom

SACD argues that South Africa has now reached a critical turning point.

The organisation wants the High Court to:

Declare the Section 22 Committee unlawful

Strike down the CRL’s attempts to regulate church doctrine, leadership and training

Reject the CRL’s classification of charismatic churches as a “national security threat”

SACD describes the case as a direct challenge to a Chapter 9 institution it believes has gone far beyond its mandate and interfered in the “sacred terrain” of worship and church autonomy.

The Fight Moves to the High Court

The application was officially served on 18 November 2025 on the CRL’s chairperson, Ms Thoko Mkhwanazi-Xaluva, Mr Musa Xulu and the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

With the matter now heading to the High Court, the future of religious freedom in South Africa is set to be contested with “unprecedented intensity.”

SACD Vows to Continue the Battle

In a firm statement, SACD said it would pursue the case relentlessly to defend the Church and protect constitutional rights:

“We will not allow any institution to erode the freedoms guaranteed to every believer in this nation.”

The organisation promised to provide further updates as the court proceedings unfold.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post Church Defenders Take CRL to Court as Battle Over Religious Freedom Reaches Breaking Point appeared first on MDNtv.

The warning follows the recent launch of the CRL Rights Commission’s Section 22 Committee, which aims to promote accountability and safety within South Africa’s faith communities. FOR SA, a legal advocacy group defending the constitutional right to freedom of religion, says while it supports the CRL’s goals of protecting victims and ensuring transparency, it disagrees on how those goals should be achieved.

“The launch of the CRL’s new Section 22 Committee in Johannesburg marked a key step toward stronger oversight of religious institutions. The committee, seen in the photo from the event, is expected to help promote accountability and address misconduct within the faith sector.”

According to FOR SA, existing laws already provide sufficient protection against crimes such as fraud, assault, sexual offences, and child abuse — if properly enforced. The organization believes that additional legislation to “regulate” religious practice would threaten the constitutional right of faith communities to determine their own doctrines, governance, and practices without state intrusion.

 “Once legislation governs the internal life of religious communities, even if called ‘self-regulation,’ it effectively becomes state control of religion,” FOR SA said in a statement. “This would be unconstitutional and an unacceptable infringement on religious freedom.”

FOR SA also cautioned against suggestions that the Section 22 Committee’s work might eventually lead to new laws being tabled in Parliament. The organization urged the Committee to remain independent, inclusive, and transparent, particularly regarding its composition and consultation process.

Instead of new laws, FOR SA recommends strengthening voluntary measures already developed by South African faith communities — such as the South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms and its accompanying Code of Conduct, which were created through extensive consultation with religious groups, including the CRL itself.

“South Africa doesn’t suffer from a lack of laws,” the organization added. “What’s missing is proper enforcement and awareness within religious communities about existing legal obligations and best practices.”

FOR SA reaffirmed its commitment to working constructively with the CRL and the Section 22 Committee, pledging to keep the faith sector informed about opportunities to participate in consultations.

“Our mission remains clear,” said FOR SA’s Executive Director, Michael Swain. “Every person in South Africa should remain free to celebrate, speak about, and live out their faith — within the bounds of the Constitution and without government control.”

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post FOR SA Warns: “Self-Regulation” of Religion Could Become State Control appeared first on MDNtv.

Alan Beesley, a Member of Parliament representing ActionSA, stressed that government oversight must not evolve into interference with religious teachings or beliefs. He highlighted that Section 15 of South Africa’s Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to freely practice their religion without fear of state control.

According to a recent parliamentary response, there is currently no legislation or draft bill proposing government regulation of churches, nor have there been any formal consultations to this effect. The CRL Rights Commission, as confirmed, has oversight functions but no power to regulate or control religious institutions.

ActionSA emphasized that while it supports efforts to safeguard communities, it will remain alert to ensure that government does not cross into the territory of regulating doctrine or internal church governance. The party called on the CRL to collaborate transparently with faith-based organizations and civil society, maintaining accountability while upholding the sacred principle of religious freedom.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content

The post ActionSA Welcomes CRL Oversight but Warns Against Interference in Church Affairs appeared first on MDNtv.