ReLPAG
Recognition of Life Long Learning in Psychology Action Group
COURT CASE
ReLPAG's latest Communique's are reflected on our Documents Page
Many psychologists have over the years expanded their portfolio of knowledge and skill to include other advanced areas, outside their initial category of internship. ReLPAG endorses the recognition of life long learning (RPL) of members. They are currently not permitted the freedom to further and broaden their expertise outside their initial category of internship due to the fear of persecution and being unfairly penalised, even if they are able to substantiate their professional competency by sufficient formal education, training, supervised experience and/or appropriate professional experience and with due regard to ethical and legal considerations, according to the Ethical Code of Conduct for Psychologists as promulgated in the Government Gazette of 4 August 2006, Annexure 12, Page 16.
THE PARTIES TO RELPAG’S COURT CASE IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE WESTERN CAPE (CASE NO: 12420/13) ARE:
THE APPLICANTS IN THE CASE ARE:
1. ReLPAG (Recognition of Life Long Learning
in Psychology Action Group)
2. JASA (Justice Alliance of South Africa)
THE AMICI CURIAE IN THE CASE ARE:
1ST: SECTION27 (Rural Health Advocacy Project Section)
2ND: CPF (Clinical Psychology Forum)
3RD: EPASSA (Educational Psychology Association of SA
THE RESPONDENTS ARE:
1. Professor Tholene Sodi (Chairperson of the PBP)
2. Professional Board of Psychology (PBP)
3. Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA)
4. Minister of Health (Dr Aaron Motsoaledi)
5. Board of Healthcare Funders of South Africa (BHF)
FRIENDS OF THE COURT (AMICI CURIAE)
Amicus Curiae Application - EPASSA 4 August 2016
Amicus Curiae Application - Clinical Psychology Forum 25 July 2016
SASCP Withdrawal Amicus curiae 20 June 2016
SECTION27 Application 2 June 2016
SECTION27 Amicus curiae 8 June 2016
The Educational Psychology Association of South Africa (EPASSA) applied on 4 August 2016 to become an amicus curiae and has been allowed by all parties. You can view EPASSA's affidavit Here.
The Clinical Psychology Forum (CPF) applied on 25 July 2016 to become an amicus curiae and has been allowed by all parties. You can view CPF's affidavit Here.
The South African Society of Clinical Psychology (SASCP) as well as SECTION27 applied to be friends of the court. SASCP has however not filed an affidavit and we were consequently informed that they have withdrawn their application on 20 June 2016.
SECTION27 (The Rural Health Advocacy Project Section - RHAP) - Catalysts for social justice, applied on the 2nd of June 2016 and has been allowed to intervene as amicus curiae (friend of the court). SECTION27 is a public interest law centre that seeks to achieve substantive equality and social justice in South Africa. Guided by the principles and values in the Constitution, SECTION27 uses law, advocacy, legal literacy, research and community mobilisation to achieve access to healthcare services and basic education. SECTION27 aims to achieve structural change and accountability to ensure the dignity and equality of everyone.
The RHAP is an initiative of the Wits Centre for Rural Health, the Rural Doctors Association of Southern Africa and SECTION27. They made submissions which will be of assistance to the court in coming to a decision on issues that are of fundamental constitutional importance, in particular in relation to the right of access to mental health care services, under section 27 of the Constitution and the right to administrative justice, under section 33 of the Constitution.
You can view SECTION27’s affidavit Here.
HEADS OF ARGUMENT
The following Heads of Argument have been filed:
* Applicants - View Here
* Applicants - Supplementary - View Here
* The First to Third Respondents - View Here
* The First to Third Respondents - Supplementary - View Here
* The Fouth Respondent - View Here
* The Fouth Respondent - Supplementary - View Here
* CPF (Second Amicus Curiae) - View Here
* EPASSA (Third Amicus Curiae) - View Here
ReLPAG AND JASA
JASA Media release 14 August 2013
The Justice Alliance of South Africa (JASA is the Second Applicant in this legal dispute. JASA’s Media release of 14 August 2013 can also be found on JASA’s website. The Justice Alliance of South Africa (JASA) is represented by:
* John Smyth (Queens Counsel and CEO of JASA)
* Trudie Broekmann
You can also view this YouTube video recorded on 20 August 2013 regarding our case of Trudie Broekmann (one of our legal representatives of JASA), talking on Kyknet’s TV show Dagbreek: Weegskaal.
ReLPAG'S LEGAL TEAM
The law firm, A Batchelor & Associates in Cape Town are ReLPAG's legal representatives. The lawyers and attorneys involved are:
* Barry Halliday
* Adv Darryl Cooke
* Adv Gavin Brown
ReLPAG'S AFFIDAVITS
ReLPAG Founding affidavit 2013
ReLPAG Supplementary affidavit 2014
ReLPAG Replying affidavit 2015
ReLPAG's Founding and Supplementary affidavits can be found on JASA’s website as well.
FOR MORE INFORMATION REGARDING THE MEDICAL AIDS THAT SEIZED PAYMENT TO NON-CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS AND THE COUNCIL FOR MEDICAL SCHEMES (CMS) POSITION IN THIS MATTER, PLEASE VIEW THE FINANCES PAGE.
OUTCOME OF COURT HEARING 21 APRIL 2016 - A SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL
Notice to set down (court date 21 April 2016)
Settlement proposal 25 April 2016
When our case was postponed on 21 April 2016, the Honorable Judge proposed a settlement between the parties. As the Respondents’ legal team was still in Cape Town, the ReLPAG ex-co members, as well as the entire legal team, were busy working on a proposed draft settlement in order to come to a conclusion after many different proposals were considered on the days following the court case.
Together with our legal team we ultimately decided on the broadest possible settlement with the finer detail to be negotiated later on in the process. In accordance with ReLPAG's vision, our settlement made provision for all categories of psychologists to be represented. The proposed settlement was made available to the Respondent's legal team on 26 April 2016.
We had high expectations after the 26th that the Respondents’ legal team will respond to our proposed settlement in a timeous fashion. As there came no squeak from the mouse, our lawyer Mr Barry Halliday, contacted the Respondents’ legal team on two occasions (5 May 2016 & 12 May 2016) requesting them to respond to our proposed settlement. To our great disappointment no feedback was received.
HISTORICALLY IMPORTANT LETTER FROM ReLPAG TO PsySSA - 2011:
ReLPAG letter to Dr Tlou - President of PsySSA - 16 Feb 2011
Ethical Code of Conduct - Government Gazette 4 Aug 2006
In 2011, Dr Emmanuel Tlou, President of PsySSA, invited all registered psychologists with PsySSA, to submit to the PsySSA office any issues that they would like the Executive Committee to include in the document to be tabled before the Professional Board for Psychology. ReLPAG presented PsySSA with, among other, a well thought through document recommending an amplification of the Preamble to the practice framework for all registered psychologists in line with The Ethical Code of Conduct for Psychologists as promulgated in the Government Gazette of 4 August 2006 (Competency Limits, Page 16), stating: "A psychologist shall limit his or her practice to areas within the boundaries of his or her competency based on his or her formal education, training, supervised experience and/or appropriate professional experience". As an alternative to the amplification of the Preamble, ReLPAG suggested the inclusion of a grandfather clause to enable psychologists to apply Recognised Prior Learning (psychological and educational knowledge) with due regard to ethical and legal considerations. ReLPAG also enquired about the reasoning behind the sub-discipline codes for psychology on the PCN system and questioned the possible consequences thereof as it was evident already then that it would lead to the exclusion of payments by Medical Aids to service providers for certain diagnoses relating to their new sub-discipline codes and subsequently disregarding all Recognised Prior Learning. Unfortunately ReLPAG's concerns were dismissed and the new scope of practice was promulgated later that year with far reaching consequences for non-clinical psychologists. Now, 5 years later, the above concerns have become real threats to the livelihoods of non-clinical psychologists and they are suffering in many ways. PsySSA decided to intervene now at the eleventh hour by attempting to facilitate a meeting between the Professional Board for Psychology and ReLPAG. We welcome them on board and hope that they will be successful in their attempt in these last few days before commencement of the High court case.