The judgments are replete with the findings of dishonesty and mala fides against Major General Ntlemeza. These were judicial pronouncements. They therefore constitute direct evidence that Major General Ntlemeza lacks the requisite honesty, integrity and conscientiousness to occupy the position of any public office, not to mention an office as more important as that of the National Head of the DPCI, where independence, honesty and integrity are paramount to qualities. Currently no appeal lies against the findings of dishonesty and impropriety made by the Court in the judgments. Accordingly, such serious findings of fact in relation to Major General Ntlemeza, which go directly to Major General Ntlemeza’s trustworthiness, his honesty and integrity, are definitive. Until such findings are appealed against successfully they shall remain as a lapidary against Lieutenant General Ntlemeza.
THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ADEQUATELY REFLECT THE MORAL VIEWS OF THE MAJORITY
PROPOSITION SPEAKER ONE: EUSEBIUS MCKAISER SPEAKER TWO: AUBREY MATSHIQI
OPPOSITION SPEAKER ONE: NICK FERREIRA SPEAKER TWO: MAZIBUKO JARA
– Eusebius McKaiser is a political commentator, columnist & associate at the Centre for the Study of Democracy; studied and taught philosophy & formerly ranked one of the top 20 debaters in the world.
– Nick Ferreira is an overqualified lawyer: Oxford PHD in philosophy (Rhodes scholar) and Unisa LLB; currently a law clerk to Justice Edwin Cameron & formerly a World Debate Championship semi- finalist.
– Aubrey Matshiqi is a senior researcher at the Centre for Policy Studies and a weekly columnist for Business Day; one of the top political analysts and media commentators in SA today.
– Mazibuko Jara is Senior Researcher: Law, Race and Gender Research Unit, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town and a PhD Candidate: Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape
THE DEBATE: The majority of South Africans are morally conservative. Any poll on issues such as abortion, the death penalty, gay rights or spanking kids shows this to be the case. And yet the constitution and constitutional court judgments are very liberal. On moral and social issues, there is therefore a giant gap between the values enshrined in the constitution and what most of us think, feel and believe. In this debate we ask whether or not the constitution adequately reflects the moral views of the majority. Does it? Do come along, be entertained and engage!
WHEN? 31st MAY 2010
TIME? 530pm for 6pm
WHERE? GIBS BUSINESS SCHOOL, MELVILLE RD, ILLOVO, JHB
MODERATOR: Joe Roussous (Wits Debate Union)
RSVP: KATIE MCNALLY ( email@example.com )
Drinks and snacks served afterwardsBACK TO TOP