Those close to the matter say that their patience is wearing thin as the Constitutional Court has yet to reach a decision on the much anticipated judgment in the historic Nkosana Makate vs Vodacom case.
Six months after the court heard the landmark ‘Please Call Me’ matter, South Africans are still no closer to knowing when it will finally reach its conclusion raising concerns over judicial efficiency and the impact of such delays on ordinary citizens.
The dispute dates back to 2000 and revolves around Makate’s innovative idea of revolutionising mobile communication in South Africa.
As an employee at Vodacom, Makate proposed the ‘Please Call Me’ service, which allowed users to notify contacts they were calling without incurring charges – a simple yet groundbreaking concept.
This innovation not only transformed the telecom sector but also generated billions of rand in revenue for Vodacom and its parent company, Vodafone.
Makate’s quest for fair compensation has dragged on for over two decades despite his contributions.
Multiple court victories – including three rulings from the Supreme Court of Appeal and nine judgments in his favour – have recognised his rights.
Notably, in 2016, the Constitutional Court criticised Vodacom and its executives for unethical conduct, emphasising the importance of acknowledging Makate’s contribution. Yet, a final resolution remains elusive.
The latest chapter unfolded in November 2024 when the Constitutional Court heard arguments but has since withheld judgment, leaving Makate and supporters in limbo.
Modise Setoaba, Convener of the #PleaseCallMe Movement (PMC), expressed deep frustration over the prolonged delay.
“The #PleaseCallMe movement has always sought peaceful and lawful means to support Mr Makate. However, it’s disheartening to see a case that has been ongoing for 25 years still unresolved,” Setoaba said.
“Justice delayed is justice denied. Makate has waited a quarter of a century for recognition and fair compensation. We trust the Constitutional Court will uphold his rights and deliver justice swiftly.”
Setoaba also called on the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) to intervene, citing the emotional toll on Makate, who remains demoralised by the protracted process.
When approached for comment on whether Vodacom was concerned about the delay, a Vodacom spokesperson told : “The matter is before the Constitutional Court, and we await its ruling.” The company provided no further response.
When asked about the delay, OCJ said that a date for the handing down of judgment in the Constitutional Court matter has yet to be set.
“The matter is currently receiving the attention of the panel of judges who sat, and there is, at this stage, no indication as to when judgment will be delivered.
“The parties will be informed through the relevant formal channels as soon as the judgment is ready for hand-down,” read the response.
Legal experts attribute the delays in delivering judgments to several systemic factors. Lucky Magagula of Magagula Attorneys highlighted resource constraints and high caseloads as primary culprits.
“South African courts are grappling with a surge in cases due to population growth and urbanisation,” Magagula explained.
“For instance, the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has nearly 40 judges, but only six research staff support them, hampering timely judgments.”
He argued that the number of judges appointed has not grown in proportion to the growth in caseload.
“This increase in caseload may be attributed to population growth, and cities like Johannesburg and Pretoria are economic hubs that have contributed immensely to population growth, which has grown hand in hand with a high-volume caseload.”
He added that complex cases, especially those involving voluminous documentation and novel legal issues like Makatei’s, require extensive research and deliberation and often exceed the three-month guideline former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng set.
The backlog of reserved judgments has become a significant concern, with some exceeding two years.
“Reference can be made to the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, where trial dates are scheduled as far out as October 2029, indicating a severe backlog.
“As such, we have seen efforts by Judge President Dustin Mlambo of the court introducing mediation as a primary avenue to be exhausted before matters go to trial,” said Magagula.
The delay in Makate’s case is multifaceted. In 2016, the Constitutional Court ordered Vodacom to negotiate a fair fee with Makate.
However, negotiations broke down, and Vodacom employed delaying tactics, often described as “Stalingrad tactics” to stall further proceedings.
The case’s complexity, involving quantifying fair compensation for an innovation that generated billions, has added to the challenge.
Magagula noted that determining “just and equitable” compensation in such a context is inherently tricky.
Despite the hurdles, the #PleaseCallMe Movement remains optimistic.
“We believe the Constitutional Court will uphold Makate’s rights, as in previous judgments,” Setoaba affirmed.
“Justice should be prompt, especially concerning a groundbreaking innovation that has benefited the nation and the world.”
Politics
