Board of Healthcare Funders hails recent court ruling on NHI Act as a victory
The Gauteng High Court has ordered President Cyril Ramaphosa to provide it with his record of decision to sign the bill into law in May 2024, despite the concerns and objections raised from the private health sector.
FILE: President Cyril Ramaphosa answered questions in the National Assembly on 11 March 2025. Picture: Phando Jikelo/Parliament
CAPE TOWN - The Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF) has hailed Tuesday’s court ruling on the National Health Insurance (NHI) Act as a victory and a first step towards exposing what it believes are unconstitutional aspects of the legislation.
The Gauteng High Court has ordered President Cyril Ramaphosa to provide it with his record of decision to sign the bill into law in May 2024, despite the concerns and objections raised by the private health sector.
ALSO READ: BHF, SAPPF given green light to challenge NHI Act
His ten-calendar day deadline to meet the court order will run out next Friday.
The BHF, which represents several private healthcare schemes, said the court ruling marks an important milestone in its ongoing legal challenge against the NHI Act.
While the board insisted it supports universal health coverage, it said this must be pursued through a practical, inclusive multi-payer model that will preserve the strengths of both the public and private healthcare sectors.
The board said the court’s finding that it does have the jurisdiction to review this matter reaffirms the constitutional principle that all public power is subject to the rule of law and the president, too, is not above judicial scrutiny.
The BHF launched the review application just two weeks after he signed the bill into law, despite having received numerous submissions on concerns and an appeal to return the bill to Parliament for further scrutiny.
The board said that in so doing, Ramaphosa assented to legislation that it contends is vague, unaffordable, and unworkable.
The BHF believes the president’s record of his decision-making process will demonstrate that he ignored compelling legal and policy objections from civil society, business, and the health sector.