A legal review of South Africa’s 1957 Witchcraft Suppression Act (2007 – 2025)
The Honourable President, Mr Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa
Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, the Honourable Mmamoloko Tryphosa Kubayi
Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr Andries Carl Nel
The South African Constitution is founded on 3 fundamental principles: human dignity, the achievement of equality, and the advancement of human rights and freedoms. [1]
In its 1997 judgement in the case of President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Hugo, the Constitutional Court confirmed that all human beings must be accorded equal dignity and respect, regardless of their membership to any particular class or group of persons. [2]
Differentiation or discrimination between persons on one or more specific grounds, and which infringes on a person’s fundamental human dignity, amounts to unfair discrimination. [3]
Contemporary Pagan Witches in South Africa remain a marginalised religious minority in a largely Christo-normative society that avoids, wherever possible, any attempt to engage in constructive religious pluralism. Pagans and Witches are not invited to participate in any interfaith dialogue or initiative on matters of common mutual interest.
This aversion to embracing religious pluralism is a product of both an historical cultural and religious acculturation of bias, and the consequence of prejudicial media narratives promoted against non-Christian belief systems.
It should be noted at the outset that historically, only Witchcraft has been subjected to legal prohibition [4] in this country, and that there is no existing South African law against the practice of Occultism, Satanism, or any other Pagan religion.
I will therefore briefly explore how cultural, religious and legal acculturation of bias against Witchcraft, constitutes unfair discrimination that infringes of the fundamental human dignity of South Africans who identify as Witches.
South African law has had a long and troubled relationship with Witchcraft.
Prior to the introduction of colonial Roman-Dutch common law in South Africa, customary Traditional courts had already developed several quasi-legal mechanisms with which to deal with accusations of witchcraft. The practice of witchcraft was often punished by death, conflicts blamed on witchcraft were mediated, persons were compensated for false accusations of witchcraft brought against them, and husbands were granted divorces when their wives were pointed out as witches by diviners. It is important to note here that in customary indigenous culture, religion and law, Witchcraft was not (and is still not) recognised as a valid belief system or religion to which people might voluntarily ascribe, and consequently anyone suspected or accused of being a witch was and is condemned to suffer the prejudice of judgement and communal punishment.
Under English law, accusing someone of witchcraft was treated as a serious offence, and those who killed alleged witches were tried for murder. English statutes banning witchdoctors and witchcraft accusations were first passed in territories annexed to the Cape Colony in 1879. The earliest legislation targeting witchcraft beliefs include the Cape of Good Hope Act 24 of 1886, the Black Territories’ Penal Code Chapter XI Act 2 of 1895, The Witchcraft Suppression Act of 1895, the Natal Law 1891, and the Transvaal Ordinance of 1904.
With the enactment of the Witchcraft Suppression Act of 1957, which unified existing colonial laws, customary law regarding witchcraft was effectively outlawed, even if still practiced covertly. [5]
The Witchcraft Suppression Act not only makes it an offense to accuse someone of witchcraft, [6] but it also makes it an offence to pretend to profess a knowledge of how to practice witchcraft. [7]
South African courts, when dealing with charges for professing knowledge of witchcraft, have historically avoided giving any credence to any claim of actually being a Witch. The Witchcraft Suppression Act prosecutes “pretended” witchcraft as fraud, and not as a harmful practice or act.
Conveniently for both the law and our criminal courts, the Witchcraft Suppression Act does not define witchcraft. In practice this means that the term ‘witchcraft’ could theoretically be used to define any act that reputes to rely on a supernatural agency, other than the supernatural agency of a God.
I have argued that the legal differentiation between magic and religion by our courts would now amount to unfair discrimination by the court on the listed grounds of religion, conscience and belief in section 9 (3) of the Constitution. No court should assume to judge the validity, influence or efficacy of any belief in alleged supernatural agency, whether for magic or religion, simply because a belief in any supernatural agency can neither be proven not disproven through admissable evidence.
Post Constitution, and in a 2005 case, Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Fourie and Another, [10] the Constitutional Court affirmed that both the religious beliefs held by a majority of South Africans, as well as beliefs held by minority faiths and non-believers, must be equally respected by our courts.
In National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Justice, [11] the court held that religious beliefs, and including the absence of such beliefs, cannot influence what the Constitution dictates with regard to protecting a right to freedom of belief.
In Christian Education South Africa v Minister of Education, [12] the court asserted that the right of an individual to act in accordance with his or her beliefs is fundamental to a person’s right to human dignity.
In the case of S v Lawrence; S v Negal; S v Solberg, [13] the Constitutional Court described the essence of the right to freedom of religion as:
the right to entertain such beliefs as a person chooses;
the right to declare beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal; and
the right to manifest beliefs through worship, practice, teaching and dissemination.
In the dissenting judgement in the case of Lawrence, Judge O’Regan remarked “By endorsing a particular faith as a direct and sectarian source of values for legislation binding on the whole nation, the State exceeds the competence granted to it by the Constitution. Even if there is no compulsory requirement to observe or not to observe a particular religious practice, the effect is to divide the nation into insiders who belong, and outsiders who are tolerated. This is impermissible in the multi-faith, heterodox society contemplated by our Constitution.” [14]
Considering the significance of these Constitutional Court judgements on the importance of the right to freedom of conscience, religion and belief, for the right to dignity of a person choosing to hold a belief about occult supernatural agency, the efficacy of magic or witchcraft, we must avoid accepting that any form of expressed prejudicial bias, whether by the State or by an individual, against minority faiths, should be excused. Expressed religious and cultural bias against Witches, amounts to unfair discrimination and should never be tolerated.
Section 9(2) of the South African Constitution provides that true Equality must include “the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms” guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
For South African Witches, one final hurdle remains to our achievement of true equality: the repeal of the 1957 Witchcraft Suppression Act.
In practice, the Witchcraft Suppression Act legally entrenches automatic bias against Witches and Witchcraft, especially in disputes regarding employment, divorce, and child custody, and it automatically prejudices our right to freedom of expression in the public sphere. By prohibiting the practice of Witchcraft, the Witchcraft Suppression Act discriminates against Witches by denying to us our Constitutional rights to freedom of conscience, belief and religion (section 15 – Constitution, 1996); the right to freedom of expression (section 16); equality (section 9); human dignity (section 10); freedom and security of the person (section 12); and our right to freedom of association (section 18). It also criminalizes identified practices associated with, and practiced by both Traditional Healers and Witches, including the use of sympathetic folk magic, the making of magical charms, enchantments or conjurations, and divination.
It is for this reason, in February 2007, that I requested the South African Law Reform Commission, on behalf of the South African Pagan Rights Alliance, to investigate whether Act 3 was consistent with section 15 of the South African Constitution which guarantees the right to freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion.
Project 135: The Review of Witchcraft Suppression Legislation, was approved by the then Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr J Radebe, in September 2010.
In March 2011, the South African Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities publicly announced its support for the South African Pagan Rights Alliance’s annual 30 day campaign against witch-hunts.
In November 2011 this Alliance submitted a Stakeholder Submission to the U.N. OHCHR Universal Periodic Review in which this Alliance detailed ongoing human rights abuses committed by ordinary citizens against innocent citizens accused of “witchcraft”.
In January 2012 the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities publicly condemned “the ongoing violent victimization and the killing of elderly persons labelled as witches” and called on Traditional leaders, community councils and government departments to “assist in deepening peace, friendship, tolerance and respect for human dignity and communal cohesion among all the people of South Africa in pursuit of social justice and equality, irrespective of suspicions that would not be able to be proven in the court of law.”
In January 2016 the Commission concluded that the Witchcraft Suppression Act’s prohibition against identifying as a Witch and professing knowledge of Witchcraft was inconsistent with section 15 and therefore unconstitutional.
In September 2017, the United Nations Human Rights Council hosted the very first two day workshop on witchcraft-related human rights violations in Geneva, Switzerland. The South African Pagan Rights Alliance was invited to attend this event. We submitted a written presentation. The workshop brought together over a hundred U.N. experts, academics and members of civil society from across the world, to discuss violence associated with beliefs and practices associated with witchcraft and sorcery.
In June 2021 the United Nations Human Rights Council’s draft resolution 47 entitled “Elimination of harmful practices related to accusations of witchcraft and ritual attacks” finally, although indirectly only, acknowledges that Witchcraft is not the mischief requiring regulation or prohibition.
The draft correctly identifies the true harm requiring remedy; the human rights abuses which flow from accusations of witchcraft.
The legal review of the Act has taken 28 years of protracted calls for public comment from individuals, secular and religious organisations, including innumerable delays in processing submissions and finalising reports, indefinite delays due to staff shortages and attention to other priority projects.
In every Issue Paper released by the Commission, it has recommended that the Witchcraft Suppression Act be repealed, and in every round of public comment, appeals to retain or redraft the current Act have delayed the resolution of the review process.
Whilst it is apparent that the Commission does support the repeal of Act 3, it has been requested, in 2022, to consider the drafting of a ‘Prohibition of Harmful Witchcraft Practices Bill’ to replace the Witchcraft Suppression Act. [15]
It must be noted here that the Commission is not empowered by the Legislature to actually draft new legislation. In an attempt to appease critics, it exceeds its delegated mandate by doing so.
Also, by claiming, as it does, that “there is overwhelming evidence of harmful witchcraft practices” requiring regulation and prohibition, the Commission relies only on submitted anecdotal allegations arising from repeated historical cultural and religious bias against witchcraft, without providing any actual evidence for the generalised allegations against, as yet, unidentified witches and witchcraft.
The current draft Bill defines “harmful witchcraft practices” as:
“invoking a claim to the ability to use non-natural or supernatural means, whether that involves the use of physical elements or not, to threaten or to cause:
(i) death or injury or disease or disability to any person; or
(ii) destruction or loss or damage to property of any kind; or
(iii) severe psychological distress or terror.” [16]
This definition fails to meet any established legal burden of proof standard!
The Commission unwittingly proposes, at the insistence of written submissions, that our courts should begin to consider hearing circumstantial allegations of threats of supernatural harm (which can never be proven) committed by practitioners of witchcraft, by claimants who believe that their own misfortunes are caused by unprovable supernatural means. The Commission is also inviting, according to the Bill, essentially fraudulent claims of harm; the Bill requires complainants to prove unprovable allegations with evidence, or face prosecution themselves.
Makers of supernatural claims therefore have an inescapable and impossible burden of proof.
The proposed Prohibition of Harmful Witchcraft Practices Bill amounts to indirect bias against Witches and will result in direct prejudice against Witches and Witchcraft IF the Commission recommends that it be adopted by Parliament. African lawmakers may still incline towards believing that witchcraft remains a dangerous and nefarious practice.
To address the issue of accusations of witchcraft which inevitably lead to violent witch-hunts, and against which SAPRA has publicly advocated since 2008, the Alliance has drawn the Commission’s attention to the United Nations Human Rights Council’s draft resolution 47, article 6, which reads:
“States should carefully distinguish between harmful practices amounting to human rights violations related to accusations of witchcraft and ritual attacks, and the lawful and legitimate exercise of different kinds of religion or beliefs, in order to preserve the right to freely manifest a religion or a belief, individually or in a community with others, including for persons belonging to religious minorities”. [17]
In the case S v Lawrence, Constitutional Court Justice Albie Sachs wrote “One of the functions of the Constitution is precisely to protect the fundamental rights of non-majoritarian groups, who might well be tiny in number and hold beliefs considered bizarre by the ordinary faithful. In constitutional terms, the quality of a belief cannot be dependent on the number of its adherents nor on how widespread or reduced the acceptance of its ideas might be, nor, in principle, should it matter how slight the intrusion by the state is. The objective of section 14 (the right to privacy) is to keep the state away from favouring or disfavouring any particular world-view, so that even if politicians as politicians need not be neutral on these questions, legislators as legislative drafters must.” [18]
Whilst the Act has not yet been used to imprison self-identified Witches who have publicly declared their religious affiliation, its existence continues to stigmatize actual Witches in general as ’criminals in potentia’. It does this by reinforcing negative and harmful stereotypical bias against Witchcraft (and Witches) which serves to indirectly encourage witch-hunts against suspected alleged Witches.
In practice, and as a rule, witch-hunts themselves target non-Witches, individuals who deny practicing Witchcraft and who do not self-identify as Witches. In much of Africa it is ordinary citizens, women, men and children who bear the burden of prejudice and hostile discrimination born from centuries of bias against Witchcraft.
Attempting to suppress the widespread belief in the agency of Witchcraft as a cause for misfortune, harm, disease, murder and death won’t stop some people from continuing to believe that Witches are malevolent and must be murdered. Prejudicial beliefs about Witchcraft won’t change overnight, but changing them must start with education, not with the suppression of access to the truth.
It should be noted that since 1957, the existence of the Witchcraft Suppression Act has not prevented accusations of witchcraft against innocent persons.
Preventing crime is not the function of legislation.
UN Special Rapporteur on Disability, Hissa Al Thani, once said, “One cannot legislate negative attitudes away, cannot draft laws to eliminate stereotypes, cannot remove from the hearts and minds of people the tendency to discriminate. But we can speak out. We can begin to eliminate negative perceptions and prejudices.”
It is my fervent hope that my legal advocacy for the recognition of the rights and dignity of South African Witches over the last 28 years will eventually result in the final repeal of the Witchcraft Suppression Act, and the end of legislative prejudice against Pagans and Traditional Healers.
I appeal to the Honourable President, Minister and Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development to finalise this review by recommending that the Witchcraft Suppression Act be repealed without further delay.
Mr Damon Leff (Gary Thomas Leff)
Dip Law – UNISA
Director: Legal Services
South African Pagan Rights Alliance
References
Witchcraft and religious rights advocacy.
A legal review of South Africa’s 1957 Witchcraft Suppression Act (2007 – 2025)
8 October 2025
https://paganrightsalliance.org/a-legal-review-of-south-africas-1957-witchcraft-suppression-act-2007-2025/
[1] Chapter 1, section 1, Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
[2] Hugo Para 41.
[3] Section 9(3) Constitution, 1996.
[4] Witchcraft Suppression Act, 3 of 1957
[5] “Cultural Denial: What South Africa’s Treatment of Witchcraft Says for the Future of Its Customary Law”, H. Ludsin.
[6] Section 1 subsections (a) to (c), Act 3 of 1957.
[7] Section 1 (d), Act 3 of 1957.
[10] Fourie, Para 89.
[11] Para 38.
[12] Para 36.
[13] Lawrence Para 92.
[14] Lawrence Para 179.
[15] ‘Revised Discussion Paper’ 158, Project 135: The Review of the Witchcraft Suppression Act 3 of 1957’ https://www.justice.gov.za/salrc/dpapers.htm
[16] Prohibition of Harmful Witchcraft Practices Bill page xxviii
[17] UN Human Rights Council Resolution 47
https://paganrightsalliance.org/un-human-rights-council-resolution-47/
[18] Lawrence Para 160.
Bibliography
Review of Witchcraft Suppression Act update
6 March 2012
https://paganrightsalliance.org/review-of-witchcraft-suppression-act-update/
Media Statement- Discussion Paper-Review of witchcraft legislation Jan 2016
19 January 2016
https://paganrightsalliance.org/update-review-of-witchcraft-suppression-act/
SALRC finds Witchcraft Suppression Act unconstitutional
20 January 2016
https://paganrightsalliance.org/salrc-finds-witchcraft-suppression-act-unconstitutional/
Update: Review of Witchcraft Suppression Act
20 January 2016
See: http://www.justice.gov.za/salrc/media/20160119-prj135-dp139-WitchcraftSuppression.pdf
https://paganrightsalliance.org/salrc-calls-for-comment-on-review-of-witchcraft-suppression-act/
Witchcraft accusations and the Media
August 15, 2018
A consideration of the ethical responsibility of journalists when reporting on accusations of witchcraft in South Africa.
https://paganrightsalliance.org/witchcraft-accusations-and-the-media/
UPDATE: Project 135 Review of Act 3 of 1957
2 August 2021
https://paganrightsalliance.org/update-project-135-review-of-act-3-of-1957/
SALRC calls for comment on review of Witchcraft Suppression Act
15 July 2022
Revised Discussion Paper 158, Project 135: The Review of the Witchcraft Suppression Act 3 of 1957
https://paganrightsalliance.org/salrc-calls-for-comment-on-review-of-witchcraft-suppression-act/
SAPRA Comment on draft “Prohibition of Harmful Practices and Unlawful Accusations of Harmful Witchcraft Practices Bill”
29 October 2022
https://paganrightsalliance.org/sapra-comment-on-draft-prohibition-of-harmful-practices-and-unlawful-accusations-of-harmful-witchcraft-practices-bill/
Media Coverage and podcast interviews
Sunday Times interview on the review of the Witchcraft Suppression Act.
The decriminalisation of ‘harmless witchcraft’ to be realised in the near future?
14 April 2019 | By Sipokazi Fokazi
Sunday Times.
Witch-Hunting in Modern South Africa with Damon Leff
9 January 2023
Interviewed by Sarah Jack and Josh Hutchinson
Witch Hunt Podcast https://witchhuntshow.com/
The Thing About Witch Hunts Podcast
Josh Hutchinson and Sarah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZbJt9xUzEo
Paganism, Advocacy & The Law in South Africa – Interview with Damon Leff
by Rev. Ryan Edmonds
Roots & Resonance Podcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yN8p17peO5s