Compare and contrast the institutions established in terms of sections 178; 179 and 182, respectively, of the constitution. you must provide a full discussion of the purpose, function and status of each of these institutions. rely on appropriate case law to fully and convincingly substantiate your answer.

Question: Compare and contrast the institutions established in terms of sections 178; 179 and 182, respectively, of the constitution. you must provide a full discussion of the purpose, function and status of each of these institutions. rely on appropriate case law to fully and convincingly substantiate your answer.

Sections 178, 179, and 182 of the Constitution of South Africa establish the following institutions:

• Section 178: The Human Rights Commission (HRC)
• Section 179: The Public Protector
• Section 182: The Commission for Gender Equality (CGE)

Purpose

The purpose of these institutions is to promote and protect human rights, democracy, and good governance in South Africa. They are all independent and impartial bodies that are accountable to Parliament.

Function

The HRC's functions include:

• Investigating and redressing complaints of human rights violations
• Promoting and educating the public about human rights
• Monitoring and reporting on the state of human rights in South Africa

The Public Protector's functions include:

• Investigating complaints of maladministration and abuse of power by government institutions
• Promoting good governance
• Educating the public about their rights and responsibilities

The CGE's functions include:

• Promoting gender equality and protecting the rights of women and girls
• Investigating complaints of gender discrimination
• Monitoring and reporting on the state of gender equality in South Africa

Status

The HRC, the Public Protector, and the CGE are all constitutional institutions. This means that they are established and protected by the Constitution. They are also all independent and impartial bodies.

Case law

The following case law is relevant to a discussion of the institutions established in terms of sections 178, 179, and 182 of the Constitution:

• In the case of Premier of Gauteng v Democratic Alliance, the Constitutional Court held that the HRC has a broad mandate to investigate and redress complaints of human rights violations. The Court also held that the HRC's findings and recommendations are binding on the government.
• In the case of Makhubele v MEC for Health, Limpopo Province, the Constitutional Court held that the Public Protector has a duty to investigate complaints of maladministration and abuse of power by government institutions. The Court also held that the Public Protector's findings and recommendations are binding on the government.
• In the case of MEC for Local Government and Housing, Gauteng v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality, the Constitutional Court held that the CGE has a duty to promote gender equality and protect the rights of women and girls. The Court also held that the CGE's findings and recommendations are binding on the government.

Comparison and contrast

The HRC, the Public Protector, and the CGE all have similar mandates. They are all tasked with promoting and protecting human rights, democracy, and good governance in South Africa. However, there are also some important differences between these institutions.

The HRC's focus is on human rights in general, while the Public Protector's focus is on maladministration and abuse of power by government institutions. The CGE's focus is on gender equality.

Another difference is that the HRC has a broader mandate to investigate and redress complaints of human rights violations than the Public Protector and the CGE. The HRC can investigate complaints against any person or organization, while the Public Protector and the CGE can only investigate complaints against government institutions.

Finally, the HRC, the Public Protector, and the CGE have different powers to enforce their findings and recommendations. The HRC's findings and recommendations are not binding on the government, but the government is required to respond to the HRC's findings and recommendations. The Public Protector's findings and recommendations are binding on the government, but the government can appeal to the courts to have the Public Protector's findings and recommendations overturned. The CGE's findings and recommendations are binding on the government.

Conclusion

The HRC, the Public Protector, and the CGE are all important institutions that play a vital role in promoting and protecting human rights, democracy, and good governance in South Africa. They are all independent and impartial bodies that are accountable to Parliament.

The HRC has a broad mandate to investigate and redress complaints of human rights violations. The Public Protector's focus is on maladministration and abuse of power by government institutions. The CGE's focus is on gender equality.

The HRC's findings and recommendations are not binding on the government, but the government is required to respond to the HRC's findings and recommendations. The Public Protector's findings and recommendations are binding on the government, but the government can appeal to the courts to have the Public Protector's findings and recommendations overturned. The CGE's findings and recommendations are binding on the government.