Wine industry players want wine to be differentiated from other liquor products and its sale to be permitted, arguing in court papers that there is no real prospect of alcohol abuse by patrons of wine farms, restaurants and hotels — at least not “to such an extent that the health system of the country will be overburdened”.
A group of Cape wine farmers, associations and the Southern African Agri Initiative (Saai), an organisation that seeks to protect the rights and interests of farmers, has launched an urgent court bid to have the liquor ban, specifically on wine, lifted. The groups suggest that wine be sold only at wine farms and licensed grocery stores, and via e-commerce platforms.
The groups were already drafting an application to challenge the ban on on-site consumption, specifically in restaurants and wine farms, when an outright ban on sales was reimposed. They then updated their court application to also challenge the outright ban on sales.
The liquor industry, which contributes 3% to SA’s GDP and is responsible for 1-million jobs, was left reeling and fuming earlier in July when the government announced an immediate ban on alcohol, arguing that the move would reduce the alcohol-related trauma load on hospitals and free up desperately needed resources for Covid-19 patients.
The wine industry contributes about R38bn to SA’s fiscus and supports 300,000 jobs.
This was the second ban. The first prohibition, which was imposed when SA entered the strict lockdown at the end of March, lasted nine weeks, costing the liquor industry about R18bn in lost revenue and 100,000 jobs. The industry is worth about R140bn.
The liquor ban is set to lead to a significant drop in revenue for the state at a time when its finances are stretched due to the health crisis. Already, the local industry has applied for a deferment of the payment of about R5bn in excise duties for July and August 2020.
In court papers filed at the high court in Pretoria, wine farmers and Saai argue that the ban on alcohol sales was reimposed without prior consultation with interested parties in the wine industry, including their workers, and without drawing a proper distinction between the effects of wine consumption and the consumption of other liquor types.
In his founding affidavit, Saai CEO Francois Rossouw contends that there is no real prospect of alcohol abuse by patrons enjoying meals on wine farms and in restaurants and hotels, to such an extent that the health system of the country will be overburdened.
“The government failed to recognise that people who enjoy wine tastings on wine farms or wine with meals in restaurants or hotels, subject to strict health and hygiene controls, do not pose a substantial risk of spreading the virus or overburdening the country’s health system,” said Rossouw.
The prohibition of consumption of wine other than at purchasers’ homes has no rational connection to the purpose for which the decision was taken, namely managing the pandemic and minimising the risk of spreading the virus, said Rossouw.
He said it “further appears that the possible overburdening of the country’s health-care system as a result of the abuse of wine specifically, which the applicants seriously doubt, can be prevented by limiting the quantities of wine that may be bought and transported by people.”
Limiting wine that can be bought by patrons in hotels and restaurants, the strict enforcement of the curfew and the application of criminal laws — driving under the influence of alcohol and acts of violence — can also be considered to ensure that there is no impact on the health-care system.
They further argue that the ban violates the constitution in that the human dignity of wine producers and employees to earn a living in the wine, restaurant and hotel industries is infringed on while it remains impossible to sell and transport wine, and deprives them of income and livelihood.
Furthermore, the freedom of artistic creativity of wine producers and restaurants is impeded while it remains impossible to sell and serve wine to consumers, they argued. They also highlight that unsold wine has to be discarded without any reward if it reaches its sell-by date. This, they say, effectively leads to wine producers being deprived of property without compensation, which violates section 25 or the property clause of the constitution.
They said the continued ban will decimate the wine industry, which is made of predominantly small and medium-sized family businesses, and lead to thousands of job losses across the value chain, “economic losses and damage that the whole of SA simply cannot afford”.
The application cites the ministers of co-operative governance & traditional affairs, tourism and trade & industry, the cabinet and the president as respondents. It is scheduled to be heard on August 18.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.