Published: 2 June 2025, 11:54 am
The Department of Health has spent R9.7 million on legal fees to defend the National Health Insurance (NHI) fund and the NHI Act, Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi revealed during a parliamentary Q&A session. He said seven legal cases have been filed—five against the NHI fund and two against the Act itself.
The department has appointed a single legal team comprising five senior and seven junior counsel since October 2023. This team, Motsoaledi explained, was necessary to manage the growing volume of litigation. He noted that the legal costs were not excessive given the nature and scale of the opposition, and that the department is not currently liable for any cost orders, as the only judgment delivered so far is under appeal.
Democratic Alliance MP Michele Clarke challenged the minister on the high legal spending, especially in light of underfunded hospitals struggling to provide basic services like food and overtime pay for doctors. Clarke also compared the size of Motsoaledi’s legal team to that of the president’s, which is reportedly much smaller.
In response, Motsoaledi argued that the real issue lies in the disproportionate subsidies received by MPs for private medical aid—amounting to R70 billion—and an additional R33 billion in tax credits across all medical aid members.
He suggested that this massive public expenditure on private health benefits undermines efforts to support equitable access to healthcare through the NHI.
Motsoaledi argued that the real issue lies in the disproportionate subsidies received by MPs for private medical aids.
He suggested this massive public expenditure on private health benefits undermines efforts to support equitable access to healthcare through the NHI.
ActionSA’s Dr Tebogo Letlape called for stronger political resolve, questioning the coexistence of the Medical Schemes Act and the NHI Act. He urged Parliament to replace the current parallel system with a single, unified health system.
Motsoaledi concluded by stating that meaningful reform depends on Parliament's willingness to act in the public interest and end inequality in access to healthcare.
Disclaimer
This article is compiled from various resources researched and compiled by the contributor. It is in no way presented as an original work. Every effort has been made to correctly attribute quotes and content. Where possible all information has been independently verified. The Medical Education Network bears no responsibility for any inaccuracies which may occur from the use of third-party sources. If you have any queries regarding this article contact us
Fact-checking Policy
The Medical Education Network makes every effort to review and fact-check the articles used as source material in our summaries and original material. We have strict guidelines in relation to the publications we use as our source data, favouring peer-reviewed research wherever possible. Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained here is an accurate reflection of the original material. Should you find inaccuracies, out of date content or have any additional issues with our articles, please make use of the contact us form to notify us.