Tjaart Jurgens Maré Doctor Legum Universiteit van die Vrystaat

394
Grondwet, wat handel oor die verkryging van goedere en dienste deur staatsorgane.
Hierdie Artikel vereis dat ʼn staatsorgaan (by die verkryging van goedere en dienste)
ooreenkomstig ʼn stelsel wat regverdig, billik, deursigtig, mededingend en kostedoeltreffend
is moet handel.
Volgens bladsy 1034 het die hof die volgende gesê met betrekking tot die verskaffing van
redes :
“....... it seems to me that the respondent is obliged to furnish the applicant with its
reasons for rejecting its tender. Not only is it enjoined to do so in terms of the relevant
section of the Constitution, but it is also enjoined to do so in accordance with the
requirements of fairness and transparency as stated in Section 217 of the
Constitution.”
Met betrekking tot die applikant se versoek om verskaf te word van afskrifte van al die
tenders wat deur die respondent ontvang is, asook ander dokumentêre inligting met
betrekking tot die eintlike toekenning van die tender, beslis die hof op bladsye 1035 – 1036
soos volg :
“..... it is clear that a substantial amount of the information which the respondent
requires to be contained in the documents is of a confidential nature to anyone who is
a tenderer. The documents concerned require details of not only a description of the
watches tendered, the price for such watches, ..... In my view this kind of information
is by its very nature confidential to every tenderer. To allow a competitor such as the
applicant sight thereof must cause the relevant tenderer prejudice”.
Die hof het dus die bevel om die konkurrente se tenderdokumente te oorhandig geweier op
grond daarvan dat die konkurrente ʼn regstreekse en wesenlike belang daarby gehad het
dat die inhoud van hulle tenderdokumente nie aan die applikant bekendgemaak word nie.
In S A Metal Machinery Company Limited v Transnet Limited788 het die hof bevind dat
versuim deur ʼn administratiewe liggaam om redes vir sy besluit te verstrek, as sodanig nie
kan meebring dat die afleiding gemaak kan word, dat daar onbehoorlikheid of
onreëlmatigheid was nie. In ʼn gepaste geval kan dit hoogstens meebring dat ʼn ongunstige
afleiding oor ʼn liggaam gemaak word, indien sodanige versuim nie verklaar word nie.
In Rèan International Supply Company (Pty) Limited v Mpumalanga Gaming Board789 het
die hof weer die reg op die verskaffing van redes vir administratiewe optrede beskou. Die
788 1999(1) BCLR 58 (W). Op 66 beslis regter Heher soos volg:“In these circumstances why should his ‘interest’ in the tender adjudication process be
regarded as deserving protection under section 33 of the Constitution? That section is not concerned with the public interest element of the administrative
action, for example transparency or absence of corruption, but in the claim of the individual to lawful treatment. Unless and until his tender is accepted, a
person in the position of the applicant is effectively a stranger to the tender process and therefore to the administrative action. The applicant’s interest, such
as it may be, does not in my view possess the qualities which merit constitutional protection against unlawful administrative action such as to bring it within
Section 33(1). For the same reasons the award of a tender in the circumstances under consideration to Interline Investment Corporation does not entitle the
applicant to reasons, either for the granting of a tender or for its own lack of success in that regard.”
789 1999(8) BCLR 918 (T).