Same-sex marriage in South Africa

South Africa was the first country in the world to safeguard sexual orientation as a human right in its Constitution.Van Zyl M"journal of social Issues, Vol 67, No 2" 2011 University of Stellenbosh 335 The Constitution of South Africa, which took effect on 4 February 1997, forbids discrimination on the basis of sex, gender or sexual orientation. These equality rights formed the basis for a series of court decisions granting specific rights to couples in long-term same-sex relationships:

• National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Justice (1998) decriminalised consensual sexual activities between men.
• Langemaat v Minister of Safety and Security (1998) recognised the reciprocal duty of support between same-sex partners, and extended health insurance benefits.
• National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Home Affairs (1999) extended immigration benefits to foreign partners of South African citizens.
• Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa (2002) extended remuneration and pension benefits.
• Du Toit v Minister of Welfare and Population Development (2002) allowed same-sex couples to adopt children jointly.
• J v Director General, Department of Home Affairs (2003) allowed both partners to be recorded as the parents of a child conceived through artificial insemination.
• Du Plessis v Road Accident Fund (2003) recognised the claim for loss of support when a same-sex partner is negligently killed.
• Gory v Kolver NO (2006) allowed inheritance of the estate of a partner who died intestate.{{cite book |title=Wille's principles of South African law |editor1-first=François |editor1-last=Du Bois |publisher=Juta & Co |location=Cape Town |edition=9th |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-7021-6551-1 |pages=367–369}}

{{main|Minister of Home Affairs v Fourie}}

{{wikisource|Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Fourie and Another}}

In 2002, a lesbian couple, Marié Fourie and Cecelia Bonthuys, with the support of the Lesbian and Gay Equality Project, launched an application in the Pretoria High Court to have their union recognised and recorded by the Department of Home Affairs as a valid marriage. Judge Pierre Roux dismissed the application on 18 October 2002 on the technical basis that they had not properly attacked the constitutionality of the definition of marriage or the Marriage Act, 1961.{{cite news |title=High Court dismisses gay marriage bid |newspaper=Mail & Guardian |year=2002 |url=http://mg.co.za/article/2002-01-01-high-court-dismisses-gay-marriage-bid |access-date=3 July 2011 |archive-date=23 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170323143941/https://mg.co.za/article/2002-01-01-high-court-dismisses-gay-marriage-bid |url-status=live }}{{Cite SAFLII |litigants=Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another |court=ZAGPHC |year=2002 |num=1 |date=18 October 2002 |courtname=Transvaal Provincial Division |juris=South Africa}}

Fourie and Bonthuys requested leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court, but this was denied and the High Court instead granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). They applied to the Constitutional Court for direct access, but this was denied on 31 July 2003; the court stated that the case raised complex issues of common and statutory law on which the SCA's views should first be heard.{{cite news |title=Constitutional Court dismisses lesbian couple's application |agency=Sapa |date=31 July 2003 |url=http://www.gmax.co.za/look/07/31-samarriage.html |access-date=5 July 2011 |archive-date=27 September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927031558/http://www.gmax.co.za/look/07/31-samarriage.html |url-status=live }}{{Cite SAFLII |litigants=Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another |court=ZACC |year=2003 |num=11 |parallelcite=2003 (10) BCLR 1092 (CC), 2003 (5) SA 301 (CC) |date=31 July 2003 |courtname=auto}}

Fourie and Bonthuys therefore appealed the High Court judgment to the SCA, which handed down its decision on 30 November 2004. The five-judge court ruled unanimously that the common-law definition of marriage was invalid because it unconstitutionally discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, and that it should be extended to read "Marriage is the union of two persons to the exclusion of all others for life." The court further unanimously noted that because Fourie and Bonthuys had not challenged the Marriage Act, the court could not invalidate it, and, therefore, their marriage could not immediately be solemnized. The court divided, however, on whether the couple should be given an immediate remedy in implementing the new, wider common-law definition of marriage. The majority opinion, written by Judge Edwin Cameron, ruled that the new definition should apply immediately. In a dissenting opinion, Judge Ian Farlam was of the opinion that the court's order declaring the common-law definition invalid should be suspended for two years to allow Parliament to adopt its own remedy for the situation.{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4055549.stm |title=SA ruling 'may allow gay unions' |date=30 November 2004 |newspaper=BBC News |access-date=6 July 2011 |archive-date=29 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190329230441/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4055549.stm |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200411/s1255113.htm |title=South African ruling paves way for gay marriage |date=30 November 2004 |agency=AFP |newspaper=ABC News Online |access-date=6 July 2011 |archive-date=10 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091010021033/http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200411/s1255113.htm |url-status=live }}{{Cite SAFLII |litigants=Fourie and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another |court=ZASCA |year=2004 |num=132 |parallelcite=2005 (3) BCLR 241 (SCA), 2005 (3) SA 429 (SCA) |date=30 November 2004 |courtname=auto}}

The Government of South Africa appealed the SCA's ruling to the Constitutional Court, arguing that a major alteration to the institution of marriage was for Parliament and not the courts to decide, while Fourie and Bonthuys cross-appealed, arguing that the Marriage Act should be altered as Judge Farlam had suggested. In the meanwhile, the Lesbian and Gay Equality Project had also launched a separate lawsuit directly attacking the constitutionality of the Marriage Act, which was originally to be heard in the Johannesburg High Court; the Constitutional Court granted the Project's request to have it heard and decided simultaneously with the Fourie case.

On 1 December 2005, the Constitutional Court handed down its decision: the nine justices agreed unanimously that the common-law definition of marriage and the marriage formula in the Marriage Act, to the extent that they excluded same-sex partners from marriage, were unfairly discriminatory, unjustifiable, and therefore unconstitutional and invalid. In a widely quoted passage from the majority ruling, Justice Albie Sachs wrote:

{{blockquote|The exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and responsibilities of marriage, accordingly, is not a small and tangential inconvenience resulting from a few surviving relics of societal prejudice destined to evaporate like the morning dew. It represents a harsh if oblique statement by the law that same-sex couples are outsiders, and that their need for affirmation and protection of their intimate relations as human beings is somehow less than that of heterosexual couples. It reinforces the wounding notion that they are to be treated as biological oddities, as failed or lapsed human beings who do not fit into normal society, and, as such, do not qualify for the full moral concern and respect that our Constitution seeks to secure for everyone. It signifies that their capacity for love, commitment and accepting responsibility is by definition less worthy of regard than that of heterosexual couples.|Paragraph 71 of the judgment}}

There was some disagreement about the remedy: the majority (eight of the justices) ruled that the declaration of invalidity should be suspended for a year to allow Parliament to correct the situation, as there were different ways in which this could be done, and the Law Reform Commission had already investigated several proposals. If Parliament did not end the inequality by 1 December 2006, then words would automatically be "read in" to the Marriage Act to allow same-sex marriages. Justice Kate O'Regan dissented, arguing that these words should be read in immediately.{{cite web |url=http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2005/19media.pdf |title=Media Summary: Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Fourie and Another, Lesbian and Gay Equality Project and Eighteen Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others |date=1 December 2005 |publisher=Constitutional Court of South Africa |access-date=6 July 2011 |archive-date=5 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305171400/http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2005/19media.pdf |url-status=live }}{{cite SAFLII|litigants=Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Fourie and Another |court=ZACC |year=2005 |num=19 |parallelcite=2006 (3) BCLR 355 (CC), 2006 (1) SA 524 (CC) |date=1 December 2005 |courtname=auto}}

{{main|Civil Union Act, 2006}}

{{wikisource|Civil Union Act, 2006}}

On 24 August 2006, the Cabinet approved the Civil Union Bill for submission to Parliament. The bill as initially introduced would only have allowed civil partnerships which would have been open only to same-sex couples and have the same legal consequences as marriage. It also included provisions to recognise domestic partnerships between unmarried partners, both same-sex and opposite-sex.{{cite news |first=Angela |last=Quintal |title=Same-sex marriages bill tabled in parliament |date=25 August 2006 |url=http://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/same-sex-marriages-bill-tabled-in-parliament-1.290971 |newspaper=Independent Online |access-date=6 July 2011 |archive-date=26 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150926054504/http://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/same-sex-marriages-bill-tabled-in-parliament-1.290971 |url-status=live }} The state law advisers, who screen laws for constitutionality and form, declined to certify the bill, suggesting that it failed to follow the guidelines laid down by the Constitutional Court. The Joint Working Group, a network of LGBT organisations, described the idea of a separate marriage law for same-sex couples as "an apartheid way of thinking".{{cite news |title=Separate law on marriage is apartheid |date=7 September 2006 |newspaper=Independent Online }}

On 16 September, thousands of South Africans took to the streets in several cities to protest same-sex marriage.{{cite news |title=Thousands Protest Against South African Gay Marriage Bill |url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/09/091606saf.htm |work=365gay.com |date=17 September 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070311053712/http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/09/091606saf.htm|archive-date=11 March 2007|access-date=16 October 2009}} The minor opposition African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) pushed for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between "a man and a woman"; this was rejected by the National Assembly's Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs.{{cite news|title=No constitutional amendment on same-sex marriages |url=http://www.sabcnews.com/politics/parliament/0,2172,133123,00.html|date=16 August 2006|publisher=South African Broadcasting Corporation|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070929123931/http://www.sabcnews.com/politics/parliament/0,2172,133123,00.html|archive-date=29 September 2007|access-date=16 October 2009}} Public hearings on the bill began on 20 September. On 7 October, the Marriage Alliance organised a march to the Union Buildings in Pretoria to hand a memorandum opposing same-sex marriage to government representatives. On 9 October, the governing African National Congress (ANC) voted to support the bill. Although the party had been split on the issue, the vote meant that ANC MPs would be obliged to support the bill in Parliament. The full party support came after members of the national executive committee reminded party members that the ANC had fought for human rights, which includes gay rights.

It was originally expected that the National Assembly would vote on the bill on 20 October in order to allow enough time for the National Council of Provinces to debate and vote on it ahead of the 1 December deadline. The vote was repeatedly delayed as the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs was still involved in discussions.{{cite news |title=Parliamentary committee in South Africa delays decision on civil unions |url=http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/07-11-2006/85402-africa-0 |work=Pravda |date=7 November 2006 |access-date=14 November 2006 |archive-date=15 June 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150615222051/http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/07-11-2006/85402-africa-0/ |url-status=live }} In response to the argument that 'separate but equal' civil partnerships would not comply with the Constitutional Court's ruling, the Portfolio Committee amended the bill to allow either marriages or civil partnerships, and to allow them to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. The chapter dealing with the recognition of domestic partnerships was removed.

On 13 November, one day before the bill would be read for a final reading in the National Assembly, Defence Minister Mosiuoa Lekota said:{{Cite web|url=https://www.southafrica.to/people/Marriage/Gay-Marriage/quotes-gay-marriage.php|title=Quotes about gay marriage in South Africa|website=www.southafrica.to|access-date=26 May 2019|archive-date=26 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190526210252/https://www.southafrica.to/people/Marriage/Gay-Marriage/quotes-gay-marriage.php|url-status=live}}

{{blockquote|The roots of this bill lie in many years of struggle... This country cannot afford to be a prison of timeworn prejudices which have no basis in modern society. Let us bequeath to future generations a society which is more democratic and tolerant than the one that was handed down to us.}}

The amended bill was passed by the National Assembly on 14 November by 229 votes to 41, and by the National Council of Provinces on 28 November by 36 votes to 11.{{cite news|url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/11/112806safmar.htm|title=South Africa Gay Marriage Bill Goes To President|date=28 November 2006|publisher=365Gay|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070926215818/http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/11/112806safmar.htm|archive-date=26 September 2007|access-date=16 October 2009}} Deputy President Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, acting for President Thabo Mbeki, signed it into law on 29 November, and it became law the following day, one day before the Constitutional Court's order would otherwise have come into force.{{cite news|url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/11/113006safmar.htm|title=South Africa Gay Marriage Bill Becomes Law|date=30 November 2006|publisher=365Gay|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061210090057/http://365gay.com/Newscon06/11/113006safmar.htm|archive-date=10 December 2006|access-date=16 October 2009}} Minister of Home Affairs Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula said the law was only a temporary measure, noting that a fuller marriage law would be formulated to harmonise the several pieces of marriage legislation now in force.{{cite news |title=Green light for gay marriages|url=http://iafrica.com/news/sa/416904.htm |work=iafrica.com |date=14 November 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071228152635/http://iafrica.com/news/sa/416904.htm|archive-date=28 December 2007|access-date=16 October 2009}}{{cite news |title=South Africa passes same-sex marriage bill |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/south-africa-passes-same-sex-marriage-bill-1.616073 |publisher=Canadian Broadcasting Corporation |date=14 November 2006 |access-date=14 November 2006 |archive-date=26 December 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071226033616/http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/11/14/marriage-safrica.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news|url=http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/730699/south_africa_parliament_oks_gay_marriage/index.html|title=South Africa Parliament OKs Gay Marriage|last=Nullis|first=Clare|date=14 November 2006|agency=Associated Press|publisher=redOrbit|access-date=16 October 2009|archive-date=11 September 2012|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120911074353/http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/730699/south_africa_parliament_oks_gay_marriage/index.html|url-status=live}}

The bill was hailed by gay and liberal activists as another step forward out of the country's apartheid past, while at the same time some clergy and traditional leaders described it as "the saddest day in our 12 years of democracy". Islamic leader Sheikh Sharif Ahmed called the bill a "foreign action imposed on Africa".{{cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna15714036|title=South Africa to legalize gay marriage|date=14 November 2006|publisher=NBC News|agency=Associated Press|access-date=16 October 2009|archive-date=2 May 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140502040239/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15714036/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|url=http://www.mg.co.za/article/2006-11-15-africans-cheer-condemn-sa-samesex-marriage-bill|title=Africans cheer, condemn SA same-sex marriage Bill|last=Macanda|first=Phumza|date=15 November 2006|publisher=Mail & Guardian|access-date=16 October 2009|archive-date=24 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190224002124/https://mg.co.za/article/2006-11-15-africans-cheer-condemn-sa-samesex-marriage-bill|url-status=live}} The law made South Africa the fifth country in the world to legalise same-sex marriage after the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada. The first couple to wed, Vernon Gibbs and Tony Halls, did so in George, the following day, 1 December 2006. They encountered no problems, and a second couple married later that day in the same location.{{cite news|url=http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2006/12/01/2|title=Gay couple tie the knot in a first for South Africa|date=1 December 2006|publisher=PlanetOut|agency=Associated Press|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070105112917/http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2006%2F12%2F01%2F2|archive-date=5 January 2007|access-date=16 October 2009|url-status=dead}} In 2013, South Africa's first traditional same-sex wedding was held for Tshepo Cameron Modisane and Thoba Calvin Sithole in KwaDukuza.{{cite news |date=7 April 2013 |title=Traditional gay wedding makes history |url=https://www.enca.com/south-africa-life/first-traditional-gay-wedding-makes-history |work=eNCA |access-date=29 May 2020 |archive-date=28 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210428163022/https://www.enca.com/south-africa-life/first-traditional-gay-wedding-makes-history |url-status=live }}

In January 2024, Jacob Zuma, who had served as president between 2009 and 2018, said his newly-formed uMkhonto we Sizwe party would overhaul laws permitting same-sex marriage if elected in the 2024 election.{{cite web |last=Mkhize |first=Mfundo |date=14 January 2024 |title=Jacob Zuma campaigns on ticket using race, land, same-sex laws as flashpoints |url=https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times-daily/politics/2024-01-14-jacob-zuma-campaigns-on-ticket-using-race-land-same-sex-laws-as-flashpoints/ |work=TimesLive}}{{cite web |last=de Barros |first=Luiz |date=23 January 2024 |title=Jacob Zuma vows to reverse same-sex marriage rights in South Africa |url=https://www.mambaonline.com/2024/01/23/jacob-zuma-vows-to-reverse-same-sex-marriage-rights-in-south-africa/ |work=MambaOnline}}{{cite web |last=Macupe |first=Bongekile |date=24 January 2024 |title=Zuma under fire for remarks about 'anti-democratic' same-sex laws |url=https://www.news24.com/news24/politics/zuma-under-fire-for-remarks-about-anti-democratic-same-sex-laws-20240124 |work=News24.com}} Zuma had previously stated in an interview with The Guardian in 2012 that he opposed repealing the Civil Union Act.{{cite web |last=Roberts |first=Scott |date=14 December 2012 |title=South African President Jacob Zuma: I'd react in a 'certain way' to having a gay child |url=https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times-daily/politics/2024-01-14-jacob-zuma-campaigns-on-ticket-using-race-land-same-sex-laws-as-flashpoints/ |work=PinkNews}}

{{Main|Marriage Bill, 2022}}

In October 2020, the Department of Home Affairs confirmed plans to introduce a new draft marriage policy in South Africa, reconciling the diverse marriage laws into a single piece of legislation "that will enable South Africans of different sexual orientation, religious and cultural persuasions to conclude legal marriages", but indicated that the process had been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.{{cite web|url=https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/470304/how-government-wants-to-change-marriage-laws-in-south-africa/|title=How government wants to change marriage laws in South Africa|website=Business Tech|date=23 February 2021|access-date=24 February 2021|archive-date=25 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225024621/https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/470304/how-government-wants-to-change-marriage-laws-in-south-africa/|url-status=live}} In January 2021, the South African Law Reform Commission issued a 300-page discussion paper, offering a number of proposals and alternatives. The commission called for public comments on its discussion paper.{{cite web|url=https://businesstech.co.za/news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Single-marriage-statute.pdf|title=Discussion Paper 152 - Single Marriage Statute|website=South African Law Reform Commission|date=January 2021|access-date=24 February 2021|archive-date=28 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210428164527/https://businesstech.co.za/news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Single-marriage-statute.pdf|url-status=live}} The proposed changes include reforms introducing a default property system, as spouses who have not entered into a formal marriage have no statutory rights to share in property which was amassed during the relationship,{{cite web|url= https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/540896/marriage-divorce-and-property-changes-being-considered-for-south-africa/|title= Marriage, divorce and property changes being considered for South Africa|work= Business Tech|date= 24 November 2021|access-date= 9 December 2021|archive-date= 9 December 2021|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211209201407/https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/540896/marriage-divorce-and-property-changes-being-considered-for-south-africa/|url-status= live}} as well as the legalisation of polyandry.{{cite web|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/28/africa/south-africa-polyandry-outcry-scli-intl/index.html|title=South Africa is considering letting women have multiple husbands. Conservatives aren't happy|work=CNN|date=28 June 2021|last=Rahim|first=Zamira|access-date=9 December 2021|archive-date=9 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211209201403/https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/28/africa/south-africa-polyandry-outcry-scli-intl/index.html|url-status=live}} A draft bill was approved by the Cabinet, and published in the Government Gazette on 7 July 2023. The period for written submission was open until 31 August 2023.{{cite web|url=https://www.mambaonline.com/2023/07/12/south-africas-new-equal-marriage-bill-has-been-published/|title=South Africa's new equal Marriage Bill has been published|work=Mamba Online|date=12 July 2023}} The bill was tabled in Parliament in December 2023, and was open for public comments until 17 May 2024.{{cite web|url=https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/767324/new-marriage-laws-for-south-africa-take-the-next-big-step/|title=New marriage laws for South Africa take the next big step|first=Luke|date=10 April 2024|last=Fraser|work=BusinessTech}} Some religious groups have made same-sex marriage the main focus of their opposition to the bill.{{cite web|url=https://businesstech.co.za/news/government/800411/trouble-for-new-marriage-laws-in-south-africa/|title=Trouble for new marriage laws in South Africa|work=Business Post|date=19 November 2024|first=Seth|last=Thorne}}{{cite web|url=https://businesstech.co.za/news/government/818222/big-change-to-marriage-laws-on-the-cards-for-south-africa/|title=Big change to marriage laws on the cards for South Africa|work=Business Tech|first=Malcolm|last=Libera|date=26 March 2025}}

[[File:African homosexuality laws.svg|thumb|300px|Same-sex sexual activity legal

{{legend|#002255|Same-sex marriage}}

{{legend|#CAF|Limited recognition (foreign residency rights)}}

{{legend|#cccccc|No recognition of same-sex couples}}

Same-sex sexual activity illegal

{{legend|#f9dc36|Prison but not enforced}}

{{legend|#ec8028|Prison}}

{{leftlegend|#cc6633|Death penalty on books but not enforced}}

{{leftlegend|#800000|Enforced death penalty}}]]

Three laws currently provide for the status of marriage in South Africa. These are the Marriage Act (Act 25 of 1961), which provides for civil or religious opposite-sex marriages; the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act (Act 120 of 1998), which provides for the civil registration of marriages solemnised according to the traditions of indigenous groups; and the Civil Union Act (Act 17 of 2006),{{efn|In the official languages of South Africa:{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202010/43832gon1108.pdf|title=Act No. 8 of 2020: Civil Union Amendment Act, 2020; Ino. 8 ka 2020: ngeSichibiyelo soMthetho wokuHlanganiswa kwaBantu ngokoBuhlobo, wezi-2020|work=Government Gazette|access-date=14 September 2024|date=22 October 2020}}{{cite web|url=https://www.parliament.gov.za/storage/app/media/CommitteeNotices/2018/September/28-09-2018/134766%20Parliament%20-%20The%20Civil%20Union%20Bill%20-%20ISIXHOSA%20-%20ISOLEZWE.pdf|title=uMthetho oYilwayo woMtshato waBantu beSini esiFanayo [Bill 11 – 2018]|language=xh|work=Parliament of South Africa|access-date=14 April 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/nso/services/marriage/kgopelo-ya-setifikeiti-sa-lenyalo|title=Kgopelo ya setifikeiti sa lenyalo|work=South African Government|access-date=10 May 2024|language=nso}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/tn/services/marriage/getting-married|title=Kopo ya setifikeiti sa lenyalo|language=tn|work=South African Government|access-date=18 August 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/st/services/marriage/kopo-ya-setifikeiti-sa-lenyalo|title=Kopo ya setifikeiti sa lenyalo|language=st|work=South African Government|access-date=10 September 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/ts/services/marriage/xikombelo-xa-xitifiketi-xa-mucato-mucato-wa-xilungu|title=Xikombelo xa xitifiketi xa mucato (mucato wa xilungu)|language=ts|work=South African Government|access-date=10 September 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.parliament.gov.za/storage/app/media/CommitteeNotices/2018/September/28-09-2018/134766%20Parliament%20-%20The%20Civil%20Union%20Bill%20-%20SISWATI%20-%20COAL%20CITY.pdf|title=uMtsetfosivivinyo weteMshado weBantfu beBulili Lobufananako [Bill 11 – 2018]|language=ss|work=Parliament of South Africa|access-date=29 June 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/ve/services/marriage/getting-married|title=Khumbelo ya dzhiela ya mbingano (mbingano ya vhathu)|language=ve|work=South African Government|access-date=30 August 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.za/nr/services/marriage/getting-married|title=Isibawo sesitifikhethi somtjhado (umtjhado ngaphandle kwesondo)|language=nr|work=South African Government|access-date=18 August 2024}}

{{div col|colwidth=30em}}

• {{langx|zu|uMthetho wokuHlanganiswa kwaBantu ngokoBuhlobo}}
• {{langx|xh|uMthetho woMtshato waBantu beSini esiFanayo}}
• {{langx|af|Wet op Burgerlike Verbintenisse}},{{cite web|url=https://wlce.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/WLC-marriage-book-AFRK.pdf|language=af|title=Ken u Regte 'n Maklike Gids tot Huwelike en Verhoudings|work=Women's Legal Centre|date=2007}} {{IPA|af|vɛt ɔp ˈbœrgərləkə fərˈbəntənəsə|pron}}
• {{langx|nso|Molao wa Kopantšho ya baratani ya Semolao}}
• {{langx|tn|Molao wa Dikgolagano tsa Selegae}}
• {{langx|st|Molao wa Dikopanelo tsa Mmuso}}
• {{langx|ts|Nawu wa Vukati bya Vaaki}}
• {{langx|ss|uMtsetfo weMshado weBantfu beBulili Lobufananako}}
• {{langx|ve|Mulayo wa u Ṱanganyiswa}}
• {{langx|nr|mThetho wobuLili buNye}}

{{div col end}}}} which provides for opposite-sex and same-sex civil marriages, religious marriages and civil partnerships. A person may only be married under one of these laws at any given time.

Couples marrying in terms of the Civil Union Act may choose whether their union is registered as a marriage or a civil partnership. In either case, the legal consequences are identical to those of a marriage under the Marriage Act, except for such changes as are required by the context. Any reference to marriage in any law, including the common law, is deemed to include a marriage or civil partnership in terms of the Civil Union Act; similarly, any reference to husband, wife or spouse in any law is deemed to include a reference to a spouse or civil partner in terms of the Civil Union Act.

The parties to a marriage or civil partnership must be 18 or older and not already married or civilly partnered. The prohibited degrees of affinity and consanguinuity that apply under the Marriage Act also apply under the Civil Union Act;Civil Union Act 17 of 2006, s. 8(6). thus a person may not marry his or her direct ancestor or descendant, sibling, uncle or aunt, niece or nephew, or the ancestor or descendant of an ex-spouse.{{cite book |editor-first=François |editor-last=du Bois |title=Wille's Principles of South African Law |edition=9th |publisher=Juta & Co. |location=Cape Town |year=2007 |chapter=Part II: Persons and Family |first=Chuma |last=Himonga |pages=243–244 |isbn=978-0-7021-6551-1 }}

The Recognition of Customary Marriages Act, 1998 allows, in limited circumstances, a man to marry multiple wives. A person married under the Civil Union Act may not enter into marriage with a second partner until the existing marriage is dissolved.

{{see also|Civil Union Amendment Act, 2020}}

File:Gay troue.jpg, 2007]]

Marriages and civil partnerships must be solemnised by an authorised marriage officer. Government officials (primarily magistrates and Home Affairs civil servants) who are appointed as marriage officers under the Marriage Act are also able to solemnise marriages in terms of the Civil Union Act. Religious leaders may also be appointed as marriage officers under the Civil Union Act, but religious leaders appointed under the Marriage Act are not automatically able to solemnise marriages in terms of the Civil Union Act.

Originally, government marriage officers who had an objection of conscience to solemnising same-sex marriages or civil partnerships were exempted from doing so if they noted their objection in writing to the Minister of Home Affairs. This provision did not apply to religious marriage officers because they are in any case not obliged to solemnise a marriage that would violate the doctrines of their religion. Several constitutional scholars argued that this provision was unconstitutional, calling it "state-sanctioned discrimination" in violation of the right to equality.{{cite journal |first=Pierre |last=de Vos |title=A judicial revolution? The court-led achievement of same-sex marriage in South Africa |journal=Utrecht Law Review |volume=4 |number=2 |date=June 2008 |url=http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/index.php/ulr/article/viewFile/72/72 |access-date=31 December 2011 |archive-date=15 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120415043719/http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/index.php/ulr/article/viewFile/72/72 |url-status=live }}{{cite journal |first=Elsje |last=Bonthuys |title=Irrational accommodation: conscience, religion and same-sex marriages in South Africa |journal=South African Law Journal |volume=123 |number=3 |year=2008 |url=http://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/ju_salj/ju_salj_v125_n3_a1.html |access-date=31 December 2011 |archive-date=19 September 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160919152655/https://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/ju_salj/ju_salj_v125_n3_a1.html |url-status=live }} In July 2017, more than a decade after same-sex marriage was legalised in South Africa, LGBT newspaper Mambaonline reported that 421 (out of 1,130) marriage officers in South Africa were exempt from performing same-sex marriages or civil partnerships,[http://www.mambaonline.com/2017/07/12/home-affairs-minister-rejects-call-amend-discriminatory-civil-union-act/?platform=hootsuite Home Affairs minister rejects call to amend discriminatory Civil Union Act] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181116142712/http://www.mambaonline.com/2017/07/12/home-affairs-minister-rejects-call-amend-discriminatory-civil-union-act/?platform=hootsuite |date=16 November 2018 }} Mambaonline mostly in the Eastern Cape, the Free State and Mpumalanga. Media reported couples being denied marriage licenses in Pretoria,{{cite web|url=https://www.mambaonline.com/2016/03/29/lesbian-gay-marriage-south-africa-part-2-second-class-citizens/|work=Mambaonline|date=29 March 2016|first=Luiz|title=Lesbian & Gay Marriage in South Africa: Part 2 – Second Class Citizens|last=de Barros}} Gqeberha,{{cite web|url=https://www.algoafm.co.za/local/home-affairs-in-port-elizabeth-refuses-to-marry-gay-couple|title=Home affairs in Port Elizabeth refuses to marry gay couple|date=1 February 2016|work=Algoa FM}} Bloemfontein,{{cite web|url=https://mamba.lgbt/2014/04/11/home-affairs-still-rejecting-gay-couples/|title=Homophobic Home Affairs Still Rejecting Gay Couples|work=Mambaonline|date=11 April 2014|first=Luiz|last=de Barros}} East London, Alberton,{{cite web|url=https://mamba.lgbt/2014/04/04/engaged-lesbian-couple-humiliated-by-home-affairs/|work=Mambaonline|title=Engaged Lesbian Couple Humiliated By Home Affairs|first=Luiz|last=de Barros|date=4 April 2014}} oThongathi,{{cite web|url=https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/parly-supports-proposed-amendment-to-same-sex-marriage-law-16581397|title=Party supports proposed amendment to same-sex marriage law|work=IOL|first=Mayibongwe|last=Maqhina|date=15 August 2018}} and Richards Bay.{{cite web|url=https://groundup.org.za/article/gay-couples-struggle-marry-richards-bay/|title=Gay couple's struggle to marry in Richards Bay|work=GroundUp|first=Tania|last=Broughton|date=5 October 2020}} A bill to repeal the exemption was introduced by MP Deidre Carter in January 2018. The bill was amended in Parliament to allow officials who previously did not marry same-sex couples to continue doing so for two years. This gave the Ministry of Home Affairs time to implement the new policy. New officials, however, cannot opt out at all for any time. If a branch had an official opting out for the two-year period, they had to have another official available who could perform the marriage. The measure passed the National Assembly on 6 December 2018 and the National Council of Provinces on 1 July 2020. It was signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa on 22 October 2020 as the Civil Union Amendment Act, 2020.

Discrimination against same-sex couples is prohibited (as is all discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation) by section 9 of the Constitution and by the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act.

The Civil Union Act makes no explicit provisions for the recognition of foreign same-sex unions. As a consequence of the extension of the common-law definition of marriage, and based on the principle of lex loci celebrationis, a foreign same-sex marriage is recognised as a marriage in South African law. However, the status of foreign forms of partnership other than marriage, such as civil unions or domestic partnerships, is not clear. In a 2010 divorce case, the Western Cape High Court recognised the validity of a British civil partnership as equivalent to a marriage or civil partnership in South African law.{{Cite SAFLII |litigants=Steyn v Steyn |court=ZAWCHC |year=2010 |num=224 |parallelcite= |date=27 October 2010 |courtname=auto}}

In a 2007 paper, constitutional scholar Pierre de Vos questioned the notion that the legalisation of same-sex marriage in South Africa represents the pinnacle of the human rights struggle of members of the LGBT community. He argued that those who are not involved in long-term monogamous relationships and those who cannot come out of the closet and get married because of the threat of victimisation may not see any benefit from the legislation.{{cite journal |first=Pierre |last=de Vos |author-link=Pierre de Vos |title=The 'inevitability' of same-sex marriage in South Africa's post-Apartheid state |journal=South African Journal on Human Rights |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=432–465 |url=http://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/ju_sajhr/ju_sajhr_v23_n3_a3.html |doi=10.1080/19962126.2007.11864931 |year=2007 |s2cid=218600903 |access-date=6 July 2012 |archive-date=12 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412043947/https://www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/ju_sajhr/ju_sajhr_v23_n3_a3.html |url-status=live }}

Historically, Sotho society recognised motswalle relationships formed between women during adolescence.{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HK6sAgAAQBAJ&q=motsoalle&pg=PT324|title=A Companion to Translation Studies|last=Spurlin|first=William J.|publisher=Wiley Blackwell|year=2014|isbn=9781118616154|editor-last=Bermann|editor-first=Sandra|chapter=Queering Translation|editor-last2=Porter|editor-first2=Catherine}} Often, a {{lang|st|motswalle}} relationship was acknowledged publicly with a ritual feast and with the community fully aware of the women's commitment to one another.{{Cite journal|last=Sullivan|first=Jason|date=17 June 2016|title=Eras in Education "Mummy-Baby" Relationships in 1950s Lesotho: Learning About Loving|url=https://www.voicemagazine.org/articles/articledisplay.php?ART=6951|journal=The Voice Magazine|volume=24|access-date=22 June 2016}}{{Cite journal|last=Ferreira|first=Alberto José Viralhadas|date=July 2012|title='The Fate of Flesh': Post-Humanist Views of the Body and Gende|url=https://www.inter-disciplinary.net/critical-issues/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ferreiravispaper.pdf|journal=Inter-disciplinary.net|access-date=22 June 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160813230615/https://www.inter-disciplinary.net/critical-issues/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ferreiravispaper.pdf|archive-date=13 August 2016|url-status=dead}} {{lang|st|Motswalle}} relationships differed from a Western perspective of same-sex relationships. Women in {{lang|st|motswalle}} relationships "marr[ied] men and conform[ed], or appear[ed] to conform, to gender expectations", and did not have a different social identity even though they were in committed relationships with other women. Women in {{lang|st|motswalle}} relationships also differed from a Western perspective of heterosexual female friends. Researcher William J. Spurlin wrote that "it is important not to simply translate into English [the] use of the Sesotho word {{lang|st|motswalle}} [...] as lesbian." Nevertheless, Spurlin stated that "it might be possible to place {{lang|st|motswalle}} relationships on the lesbian continuum to discuss, debate, and imagine them theoretically as possible sites of lesbian existence, given the close emotional and intimate bonds between the women, but with the stipulation that the relationships not be reduced to Western understandings of lesbian."{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ifTIAAAAQBAJ&pg=PP1|title=Imperialism Within the Margins: Queer Representation and the Politics of Culture in Southern Africa|last=Spurlin|first=William J.|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|year=2006|isbn=9781403983664}}

Female same-sex marriages ({{langx|nso|go nyalela mosadi lapa}}; {{langx|ve|u malela musadzi muta}}) are practiced among the Pedi and Venda peoples.{{cite book|first1=Jeanette M.|last1=Sebaeng|first2=Seepaneng S.|last2=Moloko-Phiri|first3=Ramadimetja S.|last3=Mogale|first4=Azwihangwisi H.|last4=Mavhandu-Mudzusi|editor-first1=Fhumulani M.|editor-last1=Mulaudzi|editor-first2=Rachel T.|editor-last2=Lebese|date=2022|title=Working with indigenous knowledge: Strategies for health professionals|pages=173–185|publisher=AOSIS Scholarly Books|location=Cape Town|chapter=Chapter 11: Same-sex intimate relationships and marriages among African indigenous people}} However, this is not perceived as homosexual as understood from a Western perspective, but rather as a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family. The couples are considered married, though are referred to as "mother-in-law" and "daughter-in-law". The female "husband" (the "mother-in-law") carries on the family name and property, while the female "wife" (the "daughter-in-law") bears children, with the intention of having a son.{{cite journal|url=https://www.dejure.up.ac.za/images/files/vol50-1-2017/Chapter%205_1_2017.pdf|title=The legal character of ancillary customary marriages|first1=JC|last1=Bekker|first2=M|last2=Buchner-Eveleigh|date=2017|journal=De Jure Law Journal|pages=80–96 |doi=10.17159/2225-7160/2017/v50n1a5 }} The Rain Queen of the Lobedu was prohibited from having a male husband and was required instead to take a "wife". South African anthropologist Hugh Stayt reported in 1931 that Venda women who had male husbands could acquire their own "wives" by paying a bride price in cattle, just as men did:{{cite book|url=https://newuniversityinexileconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Africa-homosexuality.pdf|title=Boy-Wives and Female Husbands|first1=Stephen O.|last1=Murray|first2=Will|last2=Roscoe|publisher=SUNY Press|date=2021}}

{{blockquote|[Venda] women in a position of authority, such as petty chiefs or witch-doctors, who have been able to accumulate the necessary wealth, often obtain wives in this way, even though they may be themselves married in the ordinary way. A woman may bring three wives to live with her at her own home... These women are really in the position of servants and are obliged to do all the menial work; they may be given to different men for the purpose of obtaining children, but these men, not having paid the {{lang|zu|lobola}} [Zulu word for "bride price"] for them, have no legal rights over them or their children.}}

Contemporary oral evidence suggests that same-sex relationships were "common" and "prevalent" among Ndebele, Tsonga, Xhosa and Zulu miners in South Africa in the early 20th century.{{cite book|last=Murray|first=Stephen O.|title=Boy-Wives and Female Husbands: Studies in African Homosexualities|publisher=State University of New York Press|date=2021|doi=10.1353/book.83859|hdl=20.500.12648/1714|isbn=978-1-4384-8411-2 |hdl-access=free}} In 1912, Swiss-born missionary Henri-Alexandre Junod described "elaborately organized homosexual relationships among miners". The younger partner, known as {{lang|ts|nkhonsthana}} in the Tsonga language (which entered Zulu as {{lang|zu|inkotshane}}), was "used to satisfy the lust" of the older partner ({{lang|ts|nima}}). "He received a wedding feast, and his elder brother received a bride price." Junod described a dance in which the {{lang|ts|nkhonsthana}} donned wooden or cloth breasts, which they removed when paid to do so by their {{lang|ts|nima}}. A Tsonga local told Junod at the time: "Each of these {{lang|ts|nima}} would propose a boy for himself, not only for the sake of washing his dishes, because in the evening the boy would have to go and join [him] on his bed. In that way he had become a wife. The husband would make love with him. The husband would penetrate his manhood between the boy's thighs. Fidelity was expected, and jealousy on occasion led to violence." He added that male couples "would quarrel just as husbands and wives do", and when asked whether the {{lang|ts|nkhonsthana}} wished to become someone's partner, he replied, "Yes, for the sake of security, for the acquisition of property and for the fun itself." This practice gradually disappeared as South Africa became more modernized and exposed to Western culture and homophobia in the 20th century.{{cite journal|title=Homosexuality in Traditional Africa|first=Chrysogonus|last=Okwenna|journal=Obademi Awolowo University Press|date=2021}}

According to the South African Government, over 3,000 same-sex couples had married in South Africa by mid-2010.{{cite news |first=Dan |last=Levin |title=Awaiting a Full Embrace of Same-Sex Weddings |newspaper=The New York Times |date=27 July 2010 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/world/africa/28capetown.html |access-date=30 December 2011 |archive-date=12 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412044346/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/world/africa/28capetown.html |url-status=live }} Statistics South Africa reported that a total of 3,327 marriages and civil partnerships were registered under the Civil Union Act up to the end of 2011; however, this figure only reflects marriages in which at least one of the spouses is a South African citizen or permanent resident.{{cite web |url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072011.pdf |title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2011 |publisher=Statistics South Africa |page=29 |date=10 December 2012 |access-date=28 December 2011 |archive-date=16 May 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180516232701/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072011.pdf |url-status=live }}{{Cite web|url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072014.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2014|access-date=18 July 2016|archive-date=18 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160818180958/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072014.pdf|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072015.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2015|access-date=9 September 2017|archive-date=12 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170712162514/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072015.pdf|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072016.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2016|publisher=Statistics South Africa|access-date=17 August 2018|archive-date=14 November 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181114234316/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072016.pdf|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072018.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2018|publisher=Statistics South Africa|page=33|date=25 March 2020|access-date=29 March 2020|archive-date=29 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200329154819/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072018.pdf|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072019.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2019|publisher=Statistics South Africa|page=33|date=18 March 2021|access-date=13 May 2021|archive-date=16 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210416085537/http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072019.pdf|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072022.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2022|publisher=Statistics South Africa|date=14 March 2024|archive-date=21 April 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240421024415/https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072022.pdf|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0307/P03072023.pdf|title=Statistical release P0307: Marriages and divorces, 2023|publisher=Statistics South Africa|date=26 March 2025}} Furthermore, not all marriages under the Civil Union Act are between partners of the same sex, though most opposite-sex couples continue to marry under the Marriage Act, 1961.

The Statistics South Africa data are further broken down by province and year; they show that the majority of same-sex marriages were registered in Gauteng and the Western Cape.

Lonely Planet has named Cape Town one of the world's top 10 "gay wedding destinations".Karla Zimmerman, [https://www.lonelyplanet.com/travel-tips-and-articles/top-10-gay-wedding-destinations/40625c8c-8a11-5710-a052-1479d2765043 Top 10 gay wedding destinations] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181123011738/https://www.lonelyplanet.com/travel-tips-and-articles/top-10-gay-wedding-destinations/40625c8c-8a11-5710-a052-1479d2765043 |date=23 November 2018 }} Lonely Planet, Our top 10 gay wedding destinations are not only gorgeous and romantic, but they also make it easy to get married on-site.

Most major religious organisations in South Africa do not perform or bless same-sex marriages in their places of worship. Religious institutions are not obliged to solemnise a marriage that would violate the doctrines of their faith. In 2007, the Department of Home Affairs confirmed that 17 religious denominations in South Africa had applied to officiate at same-sex marriages under the Civil Union Act.{{cite web|url=https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/churches-get-nod-for-gay-marriages-353635|title=Churches get nod for gay marriages|work=IOL|date=18 May 2007}}

In May 2009, a same-sex couple, Joe Singh, an Indian South African, and Wesley Nolan, were married in a traditional Hindu ceremony in Durban. The wedding was officiated by a Tamil priest, and was "complete with embossed invitations, outfits from India and [the] tying [of] a necklace with a pendant of Lord Ganesha". Local Hindu leaders criticised the wedding ceremony. The South African Tamil Federation issued a statement that "[it] do[es] not sanction such a union or the actions of the priest who sanctified it."{{cite web|url= https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/gay-wedding-irks-south-african-hindus-393330|title= Gay wedding irks South African Hindus|date=2 May 2009|work=NDTV|location=Durban}}{{cite web|url= https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/gay-couples-marry-with-parents-approval-hawan-and-priests/articleshow/4504260.cms|title= Gay couples 'marry' with parents' approval, hawan and priests|date=10 May 2009|work=The Times of India}} Imam Muhsin Hendricks has performed several Muslim same-sex weddings since 1998.{{cite news |last1=Fullerton |first1=Jamie |date=19 October 2022 |title='I'm hoping there will be more queer imams' |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/oct/19/im-hoping-there-will-be-more-queer-imams |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240125175540/https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/oct/19/im-hoping-there-will-be-more-queer-imams |archive-date=25 January 2024 |access-date=25 January 2024}} Some Jewish groups also perform same-sex marriages.{{cite web|url=https://www.sajr.co.za/gay-equal-and-married/|title=Gay, equal – and married|date=27 February 2020|work=South African Jewish Report}}

The Anglican Church of Southern Africa does not permit same-sex marriages. Its marriage policies state that "holy matrimony is the lifelong and exclusive union between one man and one woman". The Anglican Diocese of Cape Town passed a resolution in 2009 to give pastoral guidelines to same-sex couples who live in "covenanted relationships". The resolution agreed to affirm "a pastoral response to same-sex partnerships of faithful commitment in our parish families."{{Cite web|url=http://archbishop.anglicanchurchsa.org/2009/08/resolution-of-diocese-of-cape-town-on.html|title=Resolution of the Diocese of Cape Town on Ministry to Gays and Lesbians in Covenanted Partnerships|website=archbishop.anglicanchurchsa.org|access-date=30 September 2016}} In 2016, the synod voted against blessing same-sex unions. The decision split the church, with several dioceses deciding to nonetheless proceed with the blessing of same-sex relationships, notably the Diocese of Saldanha Bay.{{cite web|url=https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/more-ructions-in-anglican-church-over-same-sex-marriage-11238628|title=More ructions in Anglican church over same-sex marriage|website=Iol.co.za|date=16 September 2017|access-date=11 April 2019|archive-date=11 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411195111/https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/more-ructions-in-anglican-church-over-same-sex-marriage-11238628|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/western-cape/anglican-revolt-on-same-sex-blessing-2074994|title=Anglican revolt on same-sex blessing|work=Iol.co.za|date=1 October 2016|first=Siyabonga|last=Sesant}} Archbishop Thabo Makgoba expressed disappointment with the decision not to bless same-sex unions, but added that "all is not lost", expressing hope that the matter would be debated again in the future. Former Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane also expressed his disappointment with the decision.{{cite web|url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/religion-homosexuality_b_874804|title=All Are God's Children: On Including Gays and Lesbians in the Church and Society|website=HuffPost|date=11 August 2011|access-date=11 April 2019|archive-date=11 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411195111/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/religion-homosexuality_b_874804|url-status=live}} Former Archbishop Desmond Tutu supported the blessing of same-sex unions. His daughter, Mpho Tutu van Furth, married her partner Marceline van Furth, a Dutch professor of medicine, in the Netherlands in 2015. Shortly after the marriage, her license as a priest was withdrawn.{{cite news |title=Mpho Tutu: Choosing between the church and being gay |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36462240 |publisher=BBC |date=9 June 2016}}{{cite news |last1=Kuruvilla |first1=Carol |title=Desmond Tutu's Daughter Lost Her Job After Marrying A Woman |url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/desmond-tutus-daughter-lost-her-job-after-marrying-a-woman_n_57598d25e4b0e39a28acb8fe |work=HuffPost |date=10 June 2016}} Two Anglican pastors were also married in 2020.{{cite web|url=https://instinctmagazine.com/two-anglican-priests-got-married-in-south-africa/|work=Instinct Magazine|first=Devin|last=Randall|date=13 March 2020|title=Two Anglican Priests Got Married in South Africa}} In early 2023, the church once again refused to allow its clergy to bless same-sex unions, but directed the synod to develop "guidelines for providing pastoral ministry to those in same-sex relationships".{{cite web|url=https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2023/10-march/news/world/bishops-in-southern-africa-agree-to-prayers-but-not-blessings-for-same-sex-couples|work=Church Times|date=6 March 2023|title=Bishops in Southern Africa agree to prayers but not blessings for same-sex couples}} In May 2024, Archbishop Makgoba released a document recommending prayers for same-sex couples,{{cite web|url=https://livingchurch.org/2024/05/09/eclectic-prayers-for-same-sex-south-african-couples/|title=Eclectic Prayers for Same-Sex South African Couples|work=The Living Church|date=9 May 2024|first1=Douglas|last1=LeBlanc|first2=Mark|last2=Michael}} which the synod rejected in September.{{cite web|url=https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2024-10-01-time-for-disobedience-in-anglican-church-of-southern-africa/|title=Love over rules — it's time for disobedience in the Anglican Church of Southern Africa|first=Chris|last=Ahrends|date=1 October 2024|work=Daily Maverick}}

In 2015, the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church voted by a 64% majority to recognise same-sex marriages, bless the relationships of same-sex couples and allow gay ministers and clergy (who are not required to be celibate). The decision applies to 9 of the 10 synods; with the Namibia Synod being excluded.{{cite web|url=https://www.enca.com/south-africa/dutch-reformed-church-recognise-gay-marriage|title=Dutch Reformed Church to recognise gay marriage|website=enca|date=10 October 2015|access-date=11 April 2019|archive-date=11 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411195115/https://www.enca.com/south-africa/dutch-reformed-church-recognise-gay-marriage|url-status=live}} The decision caused backlash and objections, resulting in it being reversed a year later. A dozen church members subsequently took the denomination to court to restore the 2015 decision. In 2019, the North Gauteng High Court reversed the decision, ruling that while religious organizations have the religious freedom to define marriage the 2016 decision was not made in accordance with the church's own proper process.{{cite web|url=https://ewn.co.za/2019/03/08/dutch-reformed-church-s-decision-not-to-recognise-gay-marriages-set-aside|title=Dutch Reformed Church's Decision Not To Recognise Gay Marriages Set Aside|website=Eyewitness News|date=8 March 2019|access-date=11 April 2019|archive-date=11 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411205804/https://ewn.co.za/2019/03/08/dutch-reformed-church-s-decision-not-to-recognise-gay-marriages-set-aside|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://www.enca.com/news/court-overturns-dutch-reformed-church-stance-same-sex-unions|title=Dutch Reformed Church loses court battle over same-sex unions|website=enca|date=8 March 2019|access-date=11 April 2019|archive-date=11 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411195114/https://www.enca.com/news/court-overturns-dutch-reformed-church-stance-same-sex-unions|url-status=live}} Individual pastors are free to choose whether to bless same-sex marriages; a freedom of conscience clause allows pastors with objections to opt out of performing same-sex weddings.

In 2015, the synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Southern Africa discussed same-sex unions but concluded that "a marriage is understood as a union only between a man and a woman. Furthermore the valid and unchanged position of our Church is that the blessing of same sex unions is rejected."{{Cite web|url=http://kzncc.blazanor.com/homosexuality-in-south-africa/|title=Homosexuality in South Africa – KZNCC|website=kzncc.blazanor.com|access-date=2016-08-01}} In 2020, the Methodist Church of Southern Africa voted to allow members, including ordained clergy, to enter into same-sex unions, while retaining the denomination's teaching that marriage is a union "between a man and a woman".{{Cite web|date=2020-10-08|title=SA Methodist Church won't 'prevent' members entering into same-sex unions|url=https://www.mambaonline.com/2020/10/08/sa-methodist-church-wont-prevent-members-entering-into-same-sex-unions/|access-date=2021-07-16|website=MambaOnline|language=en-US}}{{Cite web|date=2020-10-09|title=Methodist Church of SA 'clarifies' position on gay marriage|url=https://gatewaynews.co.za/methodist-same-sex-marriage/|access-date=2021-07-16|website=gatewaynews.co.za}}

The Uniting Reformed Church in Southern Africa consists of seven regional synods. In October 2018, the southern synod, covering most of Gauteng and parts of Mpumalanga, voted to allow its clergy to perform same-sex marriages, polygamous marriages and ordain openly LGBT ministers.{{cite web|url=https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2018-10-30-polygamy-and-gay-marriage-welcome-church-makes-u-turn/|title=Polygamy and gay marriage welcome: Church makes U-turn|work=TimesLive|date=30 October 2018|first=Nomahlubi|last=Jordaan}}

The Catholic Church opposes same-sex marriage and does not allow its priests to officiate at such marriages. In December 2023, the Holy See published Fiducia supplicans, a declaration allowing Catholic priests to bless couples who are not considered to be married according to church teaching, including the blessing of same-sex couples.{{Cite web |last=Flynn |first=JD |date=2023-12-22 |title=Is the 'false narrative' narrative a false narrative? |url=https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-the-false-narrative-narrative |access-date=2023-12-23 |website=The Pillar |language=en|archive-date=23 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231223121603/https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/is-the-false-narrative-narrative |url-status=live }} Archbishop of Cape Town Stephen Brislin issued a statement that "the document states that the blessing should not be a ritual that is issued by the bishop or by the bishops' conference or any authority. It should be left to the pastor to spontaneously give a simple blessing that could be done at a shrine, on a pilgrimage, or in a prayer group." The Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference added that "the document offers suggestions for when and how the blessings might be given. The Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference will guide further on how such a blessing may be requested and granted to avoid the confusion the document warns against. In the meantime, the suggestions offered by the declaration may be taken as a guide with prudence."{{cite web|url=https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/fiducia-supplicans-whos-saying-what|title='Fiducia supplicans': Who's saying what?|work=The Pillar|first=Luke|last=Coppen|date=19 December 2023}}{{cite web|url=https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2023-12-29/in-nigeria-and-much-of-africa-catholic-same-sex-couples-see-no-blessings-soon|title=In Nigeria and Much of Africa, Catholic Same-Sex Couples See No Blessings Soon|work=U.S. News|date=29 December 2023}}

File:Youths' Views on Same-sex Marriage (2016).png]]

A 2014 survey found that voters from the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) were the most supportive of same-sex marriage, followed closely by voters from the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the African National Congress (ANC).[http://www.mambaonline.com/2014/04/29/eff-members-are-most-gay-friendly-voters/ EFF MEMBERS ARE MOST GAY FRIENDLY VOTERS] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180817225607/http://www.mambaonline.com/2014/04/29/eff-members-are-most-gay-friendly-voters/ |date=17 August 2018 }}, Mambaonline, 29 April 2014

A 2015 Ipsos poll found that 45% of South Africans supported same-sex marriage, while a further 13% supported civil unions or another form of legal recognition.{{Cite web|url=https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lesterfeder/nine-facts-we-learned-about-same-sex-marriage-support-poll|title=This Is How Many People Support Same-Sex Marriage in 23 Countries Around The World|website=BuzzFeed News|access-date=29 May 2020|archive-date=7 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171207134919/https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/nine-facts-we-learned-about-same-sex-marriage-support-poll|url-status=live}} A report conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council on behalf of The Other Foundation was described by some media outlets as the first "statistically sound, nationally representative data" on LGBT issues in Africa. The report found that the proportion of those who "strongly agree" with same-sex marriage had increased tenfold from 2012 to 2015, from 1.5% to 9.9%, while the proportion of people "strongly disagreeing" dropped from 48.5% to 23.4%. The total of "agree" and "strongly agree" making 36.6% (13.5% in 2012), while the "disagree" and "strongly disagree" totaled 46% (78.5% in 2012), the remaining being undecided or neutral.[http://www.mambaonline.com/2016/09/09/south-africans-progressive-prudes-comes-homosexuality/ South Africans are "progressive prudes" when it comes to homosexuality] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180430041020/http://www.mambaonline.com/2016/09/09/south-africans-progressive-prudes-comes-homosexuality/ |date=30 April 2018 }} Mambaonline, 9 September 2016

A September–October 2016 survey by the Varkey Foundation found that 54% of 18–21-year-olds supported same-sex marriage in South Africa.{{cite web|url=https://www.varkeyfoundation.org/media/4487/global-young-people-report-single-pages-new.pdf|title=What The World's Young People Think And Feel|work=Varkey Foundation|date=January 2017|last1=Broadbent|first1=Emma|last2=Gougoulis|first2=John|last3=Lui|first3=Nicole|last4=Pota|first4=Vikas|first5=Jonathan|last5=Simons|access-date=14 April 2021|archive-date=20 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190820230036/https://www.varkeyfoundation.org/media/4487/global-young-people-report-single-pages-new.pdf|url-status=live}}

A May 2021 Ipsos poll showed that 59% of South Africans supported same-sex marriage, 12% supported civil partnerships but not marriage, while 15% were opposed to all legal recognition for same-sex couples, and 14% were undecided. In addition, 18% of South Africans had already attended the wedding of a same-sex couple.{{cite web|url=https://www.ipsos.com/en/lgbt-pride-2021-global-survey-points-generation-gap-around-gender-identity-and-sexual-attraction|title=LGBT+ Pride 2021 Global Survey pointa to a generation gap around gender identity and sexual attraction|work=Ipsos|date=9 June 2021|location=New York City|access-date=16 June 2021|archive-date=10 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210610112136/https://www.ipsos.com/en/lgbt-pride-2021-global-survey-points-generation-gap-around-gender-identity-and-sexual-attraction|url-status=live}} According to a 2023 Ipsos poll, 57% of South Africans supported same-sex marriage, while 10% supported civil unions or other types of partnerships but not marriage, 14% were undecided and 19% were opposed to all recognition for same-sex couples.{{cite web|url= https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-05/Ipsos%20LGBT%2B%20Pride%202023%20Global%20Survey%20Report%20-%20rev.pdf|title=LGBT+ Pride 2023 A 30-Country Ipsos Global Advisor Survey|accessdate=13 October 2023|work=Ipsos}} A Pew Research Center poll conducted between February and May 2023 showed that 38% of South Africans supported same-sex marriage, 58% were opposed and 4% did not know or had refused to answer. When divided by age, support was highest among 18–34-year-olds at 42% and lowest among those aged 35 and above at 34%. Women (45%) were also more likely to support same-sex marriage than men (30%).{{cite web|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/13/how-people-in-24-countries-view-same-sex-marriage/|title=How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage|work=Pew Research Center|date=13 June 2023}}

• LGBT rights in South Africa
• Marriage in South Africa
• Recognition of same-sex unions in Africa

{{notelist}}

{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

• {{cite web|url=https://www.saflii.org/za/legis/consol_act/cua2006139.pdf|work=Southern African Legal Information Institute|title=Civil Union Act 17 of 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160104092341/https://www.saflii.org/za/legis/consol_act/cua2006139.pdf|archive-date=4 January 2016|date=30 November 2006}}

{{LGBT South Africa}}

{{Africa topic|Same-sex marriage in}}

{{Status of same-sex unions}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Same-Sex Marriage In South Africa}}

Category:2006 establishments in South Africa

Category:2006 in LGBTQ history

Category:November 2006 in South Africa