In a significant development for South Africa’s healthcare landscape, the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has ordered President Cyril Ramaphosa to provide a detailed explanation for his decision to sign the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law in May 2024.
The ruling, handed down on May 6, 2025, marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over the controversial NHI Act, which aims to transform the country’s healthcare system by ensuring universal coverage.
The court’s decision, sparked by legal challenges from healthcare organizations, underscores the judiciary’s role in holding public officials accountable and has reignited discussions about the NHI’s feasibility, constitutionality, and political motivations.
Here’s a deep dive into the ruling, its implications, and the broader context of the NHI debate.
The Court’s Ruling: A Call for Transparency to President Cyril Ramaphosa
The High Court’s order requires President Cyril Ramaphosa to submit a comprehensive record of the proceedings and deliberations that influenced his decision to enact the NHI Bill.
According to the ruling, this submission must comply with Rule 53 of the Uniform Rules of the Court and be delivered within ten calendar days from May 6, 2025.
The legal challenge was initiated by the Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF), representing 40 medical schemes, and the South African Private Practitioners Forum (SAPPF).
These groups argued that the president’s decision to sign the bill was irrational, particularly given the widespread opposition and constitutional concerns raised during the legislative process.
The BHF hailed the ruling as a “pivotal victory for the rule of law,” emphasizing that it reaffirms the principle that no public official, including the president, is above judicial scrutiny.
The organization stated, “This ruling marks an important milestone in the BHF’s ongoing legal challenge against the NHI Act. It underscores the constitutional principle that all public power is subject to the rule of law.”
The court’s decision to subject the president’s actions to judicial review is seen as a significant step toward ensuring transparency in one of South Africa’s most contentious policy decisions.
What is the NHI Bill?
Signed into law on May 15, 2024, just two weeks before the national elections, the NHI Bill is designed to overhaul South Africa’s healthcare system by providing universal coverage through a state-run fund.
President Cyril Ramaphosa has described the NHI as a “shared national treasure” that addresses stark inequalities in healthcare access.
In Cyril Ramaphosa’s remarks at the signing ceremony, he emphasized that the NHI is “a commitment to eradicate the disparities that have long determined who receives adequate healthcare and who suffers from neglect.”
The bill proposes a system where access to quality care is determined by need, not ability to pay, aiming to reduce the financial burden of healthcare on poor families and improve overall health outcomes.
The NHI Fund is intended to procure services from both public and private healthcare providers, fostering collaboration between the two sectors.
Cyril Ramaphosa has argued that the bill’s innovative funding model, based on social solidarity, combines additional resources with reallocated funds already in the health system.
Ramaphosa has also dismissed claims of insufficient funding, asserting that the real challenge lies in the misallocation of resources favoring the private sector at the expense of public health needs.
However, the NHI has faced fierce opposition from various quarters.
Critics, including opposition parties, medical associations, and private healthcare providers, argue that the bill is flawed, impractical, and potentially unconstitutional.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) has labeled the NHI a “vehicle to loot public coffers” and an “election gimmick” by the ANC, announcing plans to challenge the law in court.
The South African Medical Association (SAMA) has called the signing a “publicity stunt,” pointing to systemic issues like infrastructure decay, staff shortages, and governance failures that the NHI fails to address.
The Legal and Political Firestorm
The timing of the NHI’s signing, two weeks before the general elections, fueled accusations that the move was politically motivated.
Posts on X from May 2025 reflect ongoing skepticism, with users describing the signing as a “cheap election gimmick” and questioning Cyril Ramaphosa’s rationale.
The DA’s federal leader, John Steenhuisen, has been particularly vocal, invoking Section 19 of the Government of National Unity’s statement of intent to formally declare a dispute over the NHI and the Expropriation Act, another controversial law signed by President Cyril Ramaphosa.
The BHF and SAPPF’s legal challenge, which led to the High Court’s ruling, is part of a broader wave of litigation against the NHI.
In March 2025, the Hospital Association of South Africa, representing private hospitals, also filed a legal challenge, arguing that the NHI infringes on the rights of South Africans.
Trade union Solidarity and civil rights group AfriForum were among the first to announce legal action immediately after the bill’s signing in May 2024.
These challenges highlight deep divisions over the NHI’s vision and implementation, with critics warning of potential economic fallout, including an exodus of healthcare professionals and the collapse of private medical schemes.
South Africa’s Struggling Healthcare System
South Africa’s healthcare system is marked by stark inequalities.
The public sector serves the majority of the population but is plagued by budget constraints, understaffing, and infrastructure challenges.
In contrast, the private sector caters to a smaller, wealthier segment at a significantly higher cost, often without proportional improvements in health outcomes.
Cyril Ramaphosa has argued that the NHI’s collaborative approach, leveraging the strengths of both sectors, will create a more equitable and efficient system.
Yet, the road to implementation is fraught with obstacles. SAMA’s chairperson, Dr. Mvuyisi Mzukwa, has pointed out that the NHI’s focus on financing overlooks critical issues like ethical leadership, staffing shortages, and access to medicines and technology.
“The system is just not ready,” he stated in May 2024.
Recent news reports underscore these challenges: in April 2025, Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi unveiled draft regulations for the NHI’s governance structure, but these were met with objections from the healthcare sector.
Meanwhile, South Africa’s broader service delivery issues, such as water shortages and power outages reported by eNCA in late 2024, add pressure to an already strained public sector.
Implications of the Court’s Ruling
The High Court’s order for President Cyril Ramaphosa to explain his decision is a landmark moment for accountability in South Africa.
By subjecting the president’s actions to judicial review, the ruling reinforces the judiciary’s role as a check on executive power.
It also provides an opportunity for greater transparency about the NHI’s development, potentially shedding light on the government’s response to the bill’s critics.
As one X user noted, the ruling is a “constitutional victory” that ensures the president’s decisions are not beyond scrutiny.
For the NHI’s opponents, the ruling strengthens their case by compelling the government to justify its actions.
The BHF and SAPPF hope the court will ultimately overturn Ramaphosa’s decision, arguing that the NHI’s constitutional flaws and impracticalities warrant its reconsideration.
However, the government remains steadfast. Cyril Ramaphosa has previously stated that the NHI “is the law and will not be reversed,” signaling a commitment to defending the legislation against legal challenges.
What’s Next?
The next ten days will be critical as President Cyril Ramaphosa prepares the required record of proceedings.
The contents of this submission could influence the trajectory of the BHF and SAPPF’s legal challenge, potentially setting the stage for further court battles.
Meanwhile, the NHI’s implementation continues to move forward, albeit slowly. The draft regulations published in April 2025 are a step toward establishing the NHI Fund’s governance structure, but significant work remains to address the systemic issues raised by critics.
For South Africans, the NHI debate is more than a policy issue, it’s a question of fairness, access, and the future of healthcare.
While the government envisions a system where quality care is a right, not a privilege, opponents warn of unintended consequences that could destabilize an already fragile system.
The court’s ruling ensures that this debate will remain in the spotlight, with the judiciary playing a central role in shaping the NHI’s fate.
Conclusion
The North Gauteng High Court’s order for President Cyril Ramaphosa to explain his decision to sign the NHI Bill is a defining moment in South Africa’s quest for universal healthcare.
It reflects the tension between the government’s ambitious vision and the practical and constitutional concerns raised by its critics.
As the nation awaits President Ramaphosa’s submission, the ruling serves as a reminder that transparency and accountability are non-negotiable in a democracy.
Whether the NHI will become the “shared national treasure” Cyril Ramaphosa envisions or a policy mired in legal and practical challenges remains to be seen.
For now, the court’s decision has given South Africans a reason to hope that their voices, and their concerns will be heard.
