“Or should I also run to the police and the media every time I have a argument with my wife ?”

Possibly the most pathetic analogy I have ever read. The rest of the nation have absolutely zilch interest in your domestic squabbles. I think you’ll find quite a few of us are interested in the CC-Hlophe case.

Now picture this. You lay a complaint with the JSC, give due notice to Hlope and convene a meeting with him and perhaps with the JSE present (as honored and respected colleagues) and one week later when you are disgruntled with the outcome of events you convene a media conference. What can possibly be wrong with that ?

Or should I also run to the police and the media every time I have a argument with my wife ?

In all of this – Spuy, Ozone, Realisticallyspeaking this is for you – not one of Hlophe’s staunch defenders have actually commented on what HE did – it’s all about what other people did, and trying to make them look bad. Perhaps you three could comment on Hlophe’s actions in this situation – actions which he has basically admitted to? Do you think he should be vindicated?
What is his case?

Ozone @ 2:25 – picture this: The CC judges do not make a media statement. Through various actions, eventually it becomes known that the judges laid a complaint a while back, and it has been dealt with. If Hlophe was found innocent, the credibility of the CC and JSC would be in tatters – it would look like one big cover up. The CC did not defame the man (unlike he himself tends to do apparently), they did not criticise his abilities, they did not get personal – they merely issued a statement regarding the facts. In a democracy, when the judges of the highest court in the land lay a complaint about another senior judge, that’s what we’d call ‘public interest’ – as the public, we have a right to know, because we need to put our faith in these people. In addition, given that a stable legal system is a big plus on foreign investor scorecards, it helps to assure international investors that our judiciary is intact (I only mention this based on the ANC’s concern for upsetting our biggest trading partner – clearly upsetting foreign investors is important to them).

In all of this – Spuy, Ozone, Realisticallyspeaking this is for you – not one of Hlophe’s staunch defenders have actually commented on what HE did – it’s all about what other people did, and trying to make them look bad. Perhaps you three could comment on Hlophe’s actions in this situation – actions which he has basically admitted to? Do you think he should be vindicated?

Bliksem maar jy is darem ‘n groot rassis!!

Ozone, I dont know about Pierre, but the reason I’m obsessed with the prosecution of Zuma is because he is most probably going to be my president and I have an obsession with knowing that my president is not tainted by corruption. And because he is obviously the people’s clear favourite for their leader I am also hoping that he is prosecuted and found not guilty beyond any doubt. I dont really care about Blair or Thint or father Christmas at this stage because they are not going to be my president. Not that they should not be prosecuted, they just aren’t part of my obsession because they’re not going to make a difference in my life or yours. (That is assuming you don’t still believe in father Christmas)

Why are you so obsessed with one thing only, Pierre – the prosecution of Zuma ?

How many times do I have to tell you that I want, in the name of justice, everyone implicated in the arms-deal prosecuted : including but not limited to Tony Blair.

Why would that not happen PdV : because you know and I know that the international arms trade is one of the dirtiest businesses around and we are talking BIG TIME politics, complex international relationships and “national security”. Why is that – even when you know that Zuma was not the biggest “crook” but him and Shaik are probably the only ones who would get nailed in this witch hunt : you somehow feel that ethically and morally that would be a job well done ?

LOL.