By Mariette le Roux
Constitutional Court judges on Thursday quizzed an advocate who argued that fathers defaulting on their child maintenance payments had as many problems with court processes as the children's mothers.
"It is not only women who have these difficulties," Martin van Twisk told the court in response to arguments that mothers struggled to get their maintenance payments as a result of court inadequacies.
Van Twisk was representing maintenance defaulter Laurie Noel Bannatyne, whose ex-wife Nadena is seeking to have him jailed for failing to pay support for their two children in terms of a maintenance court order.
Judge Johann Kriegler responded: "They (fathers) simply don't pay... (pending the outcome of applications for reductions in maintenance payments). Isn't that the way it still works? It is the mother who bears the burden."
The Supreme Court of Appeal earlier in 2002 overturned a Pretoria High Court order for Bannatyne's 90-day jail sentence for contempt to be suspended on condition that he paid an outstanding amount of R34 366.
At issue before the court is whether a High Court can enforce orders given by lower courts. Lower courts could also impose jail sentences, but lawyers contended that this was a lengthy process and not easily enforceable.
Pieter Oosthuizen, representing Nadena Bannatyne, argued that High Courts should be able to intervene if asked.
Oosthuizen said that his client had been trying for more than a year to have the maintenance order enforced before she approached the High Court for relief.
Geoff Budlender, from the Commission for Gender Equality, said the maintenance system in the lower courts was ineffective and slow, with recipients often struggling to get their money.
Van Twisk told the judges his client had since paid the arrears, but admitted he made only one monthly payment in the past 18 months.
Van Twisk said his client had been trying to have the amount reduced for more than a year, but had been unable to gain access to a court.
Judgment was reserved. - Sapa