Public participation: why bird breeders must speak up early

When proposed legislation could affect your birds, breeding activities or livelihood, your practical experience matters. Clear examples from members help PASA/PVSA explain concerns and propose workable solutions.

A Constitutional Court judgment delivered on 9 October 2026 highlights the importance of acting promptly.

In South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others, CCT 270/24, [2026] ZACC 42, the Court dismissed a challenge concerning public participation in the introduction of NEMBA’s animal well-being provisions. It declined to overlook unreasonable delay.

The Court also explained that continuing policy discussions with authorities did not justify delaying a legal challenge to legislation already passed.

What this means for bird breeders

The judgment does not introduce a new bird-breeding permit or filing deadline. The animal well-being provisions challenged in the case remain in force.

For PASA/PVSA and its members, the practical lesson is to participate early, document concerns and keep records. Where serious legal concerns arise, engagement with authorities should be accompanied by timely legal advice.

A further consultation round is not automatic whenever a draft changes. Requests for renewed consultation should explain what changed and why those changes materially affect the people concerned.

Help your club present a clear case

Useful member input includes:

  • The species and activities affected by a proposal.
  • Additional costs, delays or duplicated permits.
  • Requirements that would be difficult to implement, with reasons.
  • Effects on employment, small businesses and supporting services.
  • Practical alternatives that protect biodiversity and animal welfare.

Keep copies of your submissions, supporting documents and acknowledgements.

Please send specific concerns to your club committee when a proposal is circulated. Detailed, factual input gives PASA/PVSA a stronger basis for representing members and asking for clear, proportionate and workable requirements.

Source: Constitutional Court judgment — CCT 270/24.

Scroll to Top