The Democratic Alliance (DA) is in court today challenging the constitutionality of Section 15A of the Employment Equity Amendment Act, arguing that the new provisions impose rigid race-based quotas that threaten jobs, investment, and individual rights.

However, Employment and Labour Minister Nomakhosazana Meth has hit back, accusing the DA of trying to stall transformation and preserve workplace inequalities.

The case, being heard in the North Gauteng High Court, marks a significant legal showdown over how transformation is pursued in post-apartheid South Africa.

The DA argues that the amendments in the Act grants the Minister unchecked power to enforce national demographic targets on employers, without sufficient regard for local labour conditions, skills shortages, or business realities.

Companies that fail to meet these targets face hefty penalties and possible criminal sanctions.

“This is not about resisting redress,” said DA MP Michael Bagraim. “It’s about preventing racial exclusion under a new name and protecting South Africans from unconstitutional discrimination.”

He warned that the quotas could have particularly damaging effects on coloured workers in the Western Cape and Indian workers in KwaZulu-Natal.

DA Federal Council Chairperson Helen Zille called the law a tool of “totalitarian social engineering,” arguing it allows government to override context and merit in employment decisions.

“This amendment doesn’t meet the constitutional benchmark of fairness. It dehumanises individuals by reducing them to racial statistics,” she said.

Zille added that unemployment has doubled since 2008, and laws like this one only deter investment and job creation.

In response, Minister Meth issued a strongly worded statement defending the Act and criticising the DA’s legal action.

“This is a clear attempt to halt transformation in the workplace and preserve historical inequalities,” she said.

Meth maintained that the Act does not impose rigid quotas but instead introduces “flexible employment equity targets” designed to ensure fair representation across all occupational levels.

According to the Minister, the process is consultative and guided by sector-specific advice from the Employment Equity Commission. She said designated employers are allowed to justify non-compliance based on reasonable grounds, adding that “the Minister does not act arbitrarily.”

Meth insisted the DA’s challenge misrepresents the purpose and structure of the Act. “By opposing these amendments, the DA is actively sabotaging the transformation goals pursued since the end of apartheid,” she said.

“This stance is not only anti-transformation, but also a step backward in the fight for equality.”

Despite these assurances, the DA maintains that Section 15A violates Section 9 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality and prohibits unfair discrimination.

They also argue the Act was improperly passed under Section 75 of the Constitution, when its provincial implications demand Section 76 tagging.

The DA’s legal action seeks not just to overturn specific quotas, but to strike down the enabling provision itself.

“Every law must be judged by whether it grows the economy and creates jobs,” Bagraim said. “This one fails that test spectacularly.”