Office of the President [date unknown] www.independentliving.org, where it is stated that 'legislation has contributed to the social exclusion of people with disabilities. First, legislation fails to protect the rights of people with disabilities and, second, through legislation, barriers are created to prevent people with disabilities from accessing equal opportunities.

Unlike most other countries in

This paper discusses the challenge of the misappropriation of retirement fund assets by trustees, fund asset managers and retirement funds’ administrators. It demonstrates that retirement fund members lose substantial retirement benefits due to the illegal and unlawful conduct of those who manage and administer retirement funds. It evaluates whether the South African legislative framework offers retirement funds and their members adequate protection from activities that may compromise the delivery of the pension promise such as: mismanagement; fraudulent activities; gross negligence; and the outright looting of retirement fund assets. In particular, this paper illustrates that the law in South Africa does not deter would-be wrongdoers from acting in a manner that may compromise the benefits expected by retirement fund members when they exit their funds. It advocates the adoption of adequate preventative legislative measures that would make it difficult for anyone to act in a manner that would compromise retirement fund members' benefits in South Africa.

Inequality, discrimination and transformation remain the key challenges which most employers are faced with in the South African labour market. Key among such challenges has also been employers' ability to ensure that persons with disabilities access the labour market. In this paper I highlight employment discrimination experienced by persons with disabilities in South African workplaces, which often prohibits them from accessing employment opportunities. I argue that employers need to consider employing persons with disabilities and also reasonably to accommodate them within South African workplaces. I further illustrate efforts by the legislature to eradicate forms of unjustified discrimination against persons with disabilities through the enactment of the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998. I argue that all of us need to understand how cultural, social, physical and other barriers continue to prevent persons with disabilities in South Africa from enjoying their constitutional rights to equality, freedom and human dignity, and further, that it is desirable that society at large and government work together towards eradicating barriers which prevent persons with disabilities from accessing the labour market.

Over the years, the South African retirement fund industry has experienced major regulatory changes. These changes were aimed at imposing a higher standard of governance on the boards of trustees governing various pension funds. As such, there has been a debate within the retirement fund industry as to whom the board, as the governing and managing body of the retirement fund, is accountable. South African courts and tribunals adjudicating pension fund related disputes and the retirement industry at large seem to share the view that the board of trustees is accountable to both the fund and its members. In that the board of trustees owes fiduciary duties to both the fund and its members, meaning that the board is required to act in the best interest of the fund and its members. However, in this paper I demonstrate that the boards of trustees of South African Pension Funds are accountable to and owe fiduciary duties only to the fund they serve and not members of those funds. Furthermore, I submit that at the very best the board owes a duty of good faith towards the members of the fund. In order to substantiate my submissions, I distinguish the legal position relating to trust law from the law relating to retirement funds in South Africa.