Questions are mounting about the delays in the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) case against the Beloftebos wedding venue which recently marked five years without resolution.
In March 2020, the SAHRC announced at a media briefing that it had filed a case on behalf of two same-sex couples at the Western Cape High Court, sitting as the Equality Court. The case accused Beloftebos of discriminating against the LGBTQ+ community by refusing to host same-sex weddings.
Supported by the Commission for Gender Equality, the SAHRC asked the court to declare Beloftebos’s policy of denying services to same-sex couples as unfair discrimination and to compel the venue and its owners to cease this practice.
Beloftebos had been implicated in at least two such cases—first in 2017, and again in 2020—when Sasha-Lee Heekes and Megan Watling were turned away. The owners, Coia and Andries de Villiers, informed them that their “Biblical conviction is that marriage is reserved for a life-long commitment between one man and one woman.”
Couple Criticises SAHRC’s Approach
Heekes and Watling, who later married at another venue, had planned to file their own Equality Court case against the Stanford-based venue. They accused the SAHRC of “hijacking” their case for media attention and criticised the commission for its earlier failure to act on the 2017 incident.
Despite the SAHRC’s public launch of the case, the matter stalled for nearly two years. It later emerged that the commission had entered settlement negotiations with the venue owners—reportedly without informing the couple.
“Megan and Sasha had to learn via the media that the SAHRC was entering into settlement negotiations with Beloftebos without involving any of the other applicants in the matter or even informing them,” said their spokesperson, Johan Pienaar, at the time.
Settlement Fails, Venue Stops Hosting Weddings
The talks collapsed, and Beloftebos announced it would stop hosting all weddings rather than be compelled to serve same-sex couples. Nevertheless, the owners continued to assert that they had a constitutional right to act on their religious beliefs—even if it meant rejecting queer clients.
While the Beloftebos website no longer indicates that the venue hosts weddings, it states that the owners and their family are “known for supporting the 2000-year-old biblical view of marriage being a covenant between one man and one woman” and “are passionate about building kingdom marriages and families.”
Responding to MambaOnline’s queries about the case’s progress, SAHRC Communications Coordinator Wisani Baloyi confirmed that Heekes and Watling had lodged an application to formally intervene in the proceedings.
“The parties are currently engaging with one another and the court to obtain a date for a case management meeting as well as a date to hear this application to intervene. A preliminary date is likely to be in late August 2025. However, only once this application is heard can the main application by the Commission proceed,” explained Baloyi.
Delays and Frustrations Mount
When asked if the five-year delay was excessive, Baloyi replied, “not necessarily” and that “numerous things can cause a delay in a court case”, while acknowledging that failed attempts to settle the matter had contributed to the holdup.
He also cited the couple’s application to intervene and a separate application by the Women’s Legal Centre to join as amicus curiae as possible additional causes. He added that the parties had struggled to secure court dates for both the intervening and main applications.
Responding to criticism from Heekes and Watling that the SAHRC had mishandled the case and shown little interest in pursuing justice, Baloyi said: “This is denied, but we, unfortunately, cannot comment further as these allegations have been raised in court and will need to be addressed in that forum.”
“The Commission Doesn’t Care About Us”
Speaking to MambaOnline, Heekes expressed ongoing disillusionment with the SAHRC. “The SAHRC had years before our case to show up; where were they then? They’ve only made it harder for us to see justice — actually, at this point, for us just to get a date. The Commission does not care about us, the case, or the rights of the queer community.”
She continued: “What we want to see is the case moving forward. We are so grateful to have a team who are working tirelessly to make sure the matter is treated with the care it deserves, and we find hope in that.”
Heekes emphasised that the couple does not want to focus on an adversarial dynamic with the SAHRC, “but rather a collective and resounding message that the rights of LGBTQ+ people matter, that those rights must be unequivocally upheld and affirmed, and that the failure to do so will not go unchecked.”
Broader Implications for LGBTQ+ Equality
Regardless of the specific reasons, the delay is unlikely to instill confidence in the Equality Courts or the SAHRC among LGBTQ+ South Africans. For many, committing the time, energy and financial resources to pursue justice through a system plagued by such possible delays could be a daunting—and discouraging—prospect.
Despite Beloftebos ceasing its wedding operations, Heekes and Watling remain resolute in their pursuit of justice. “We are married now; it’s not about us forcing Beloftebos to let us get married there, we would never support a business like theirs,” they told MambaOnline.
“It is about ensuring that no other business can follow suit. That no other business can discriminate in the name of religion or on any of the grounds protected by the Constitution. We need the courts to set a precedent that this will not be tolerated. That this is unconstitutional. That this cannot and should not be happening. We will not be pushed into the margins.”
