Committee Chair Resigns: CRL Commission's regulatory process rocked by controversy

The Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission) has been plunged into deeper controversy, with its process to have religious institutions regulated backfiring following the resignation of the commission’s Section 22 Committee chairperson, the Reverend Professor Musa Xulu.

Announcing his resignation on Thursday, Xulu said: “I have done everything within my power to discharge my duties faithfully and in line with my appointment. However, I can no longer serve as Chair of a Committee the processes of which I do not control, the outcomes of which I do not endorse, and the existence of which is being used as a front to disguise a predetermined agenda of State control of religion, driven in part by personal hostility toward particular Christian faith and traditions.” 

Xulu resigned with immediate effect and made the announcement at a briefing to which senior church and other religious leaders had been invited at the Birchwood Hotel and OR Tambo Conference Centre.

He said to remain would have compromised his integrity as an ordained and commissioned religious minister, thus he decided to resign “with sadness, but with a clear conscience”.

Late last year church followers and other supporters marched to Pretoria to express their opposition of what they saw as the government’s attempt to control the religious sector. The South African Church Defenders (SACD) followed this by filing a review application in the Johannesburg High Court challenging the establishment of the committee, arguing that it was unlawfully established to craft a sweeping regulatory regime to exercise oversight over churches and other religious organisations, their governance structures, leadership and even doctrine.

Regulatory Framework

Recently, the South African Council of Churches (SACC) said it was engaging “with caution and openness” in the committee’s process.

This was after the committee published a “Draft Self-Regulatory Framework for the Christian Sector” as part of a national consultation process.

The CRL said this was not a framework for state control, but one for “freedom with responsibility”, which will restore and strengthen public trust, and protect the integrity of the religious sector from being tarnished by the failures of those who give it a bad name.

Reverend Mzwandile Molo, South African Council of Churches (SACC) general secretary, said the SACC was engaging the CRL’s Section 22 process with caution and openness. He said they understood the process to be one of consultation.

“The SACC and its member churches are engaging the process of the CRL with a commitment to find a solution that protects the constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of religion, conscience, freedom of assembly, etc., while ensuring that ordinary people are protected from abuse and exploitation,” Molo stated. 

The CRL previously said in a statement: “We have witnessed the devastating reports of exploitation, where the vulnerable have been fed false promises and harmful substances. We have seen the pain of financial abuse and the scandal of moral failure in places meant to offer sanctuary. 

“We have heard the cries of those hurt within our own walls. These actions have cast a shadow, not only on the institutions involved but on the glorious name of Christ we all proclaim.”

The CRL further stated that the draft framework was built on three pillars of internal governance and accountability, a code of ethical and professional conduct, and legal and regulatory compliance.

Allegations of Irregularities

Announcing his resignation today, Xulu said he had called the briefing because it had “become necessary", in the interests of transparency, constitutional accountability, and personal integrity, to resign and that he needed to explain the circumstances.

“My appointment, confirmed in writing on 25 April 2025, was clear. I was to chair the  Section 22 Committee, to call and preside over its meetings, and to conduct extensive research into abuses within the Christian religious sector, with a view to protecting religious freedom, not undermining it. I wish to emphasise that there was no reference whatsoever in my letter of appointment to the development of a legislative framework, or to any form of State control of religion. On the contrary, my understanding was that the task before me and the Section 22 Committee was to explore self-regulation,  grounded in Scripture, Church history, sound theology, and the lived experience of  Christian communities in South Africa,” he said.  

He said he had approached his work as an academic and worked with theologians, scholars and church leaders across denominations. He said he believed that this process “had to win the confidence of the Church, not undermine it”.

He made reference to allegations of irregularities connected with the commission’s work, its formation, the appointment of some members to it, and some “toxic” and “exclusionary” meetings and other processes.

Xulu complained that the committee’s terms of reference kept “changing almost daily”.

“I was surprised during the launch event of the Committee on the 2nd October 2025, where I was required to read the terms of reference. While I was on my way to the podium to speak (and holding the terms of reference which are contained in my letter of appointment), a CRL official hurriedly gave me a new set of terms of reference to read out to the public and comment. That was embarrassing to me, even a bit dishonest on the part of whoever suddenly came up with new terms of reference.”

Call for Independent Inquiry

Reacting to the resignation Freedom of Religion South Africa (FOR SA), said it took Xulu’s claims “extremely seriously, particularly in light of the CRL Chair’s  repeated public assurances that neither she nor her office played any role beyond that of a  neutral secretariat”.

FOR SA, a non-profit organisation for the protection of religious freedom, called for an urgent, independent inquiry and the suspension of the ongoing regulatory framework process. 

“Regardless of how the CRL Chair frames this agenda as ‘self-regulation’ or how often she  publicly affirms that freedom of religion is sacrosanct, actions matter more than rhetoric. In  Professor Xulu’s account, these actions fundamentally contradict the constitutional role of a Chapter 9 institution, which must model independence, restraint, integrity, and constitutional values, especially when engaging a core democratic right such as freedom of religion,” said FOR SA in a statement on Friday.