Comments on: How low can you go?

By: Pierre De Vos

Pierre De Vos — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:44:56 +0000

Skhokho Radebe, I advise you read the SCA judgment in Midi Television case where the sub judice rule (always abused by politicians during the apartheid years) was in effect dismantled. We live in a democracy now with free speech. If your view was to be adhered to, then all the people outside the courts during Zuma’s various appearances would have had to be prosecuted, as would have Gwede Mantashe and Julius Malema as well as several other ANC leaders. What one cannot and should not do is to impugn the integrity of judges by saying they will or have decided a case based on their race, sex or previous political affiliations. Robust discussions about public officers of the court like advocates seems to me the duty of any responsible and well informed citizen. Robust criticism of the actions and statements of judges must be treated in the same way. As long as one always respect the institution and do not ascribe motives to someone based on one’s own race or sex prejudices, one is being a good democrat for engaging the law and the decision of judges. But I guess those who cannot answer criticism they do not like, has no other way of defending themselves than trying to shut up the critic. In my case, it is not going to work. Sorry.

By: Garg Unzola

Garg Unzola — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:03:49 +0000

Resepek is earned and not a right!

By: Garg Unzola

Garg Unzola — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:02:36 +0000

Dignity is a very subjective matter and I don’t feel that it has any place in law. However, if your reputation is tarnished and you start losing your income as a result, like poor Joost van der Westhuizen lately, it becomes a grey area.

To me, the law should protect your rights and not your privileges. The law should protect your property rights and your fundamental rights like freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc but it has no place in making you a nice guy.

By: Clara

Clara — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:05:38 +0000

Michael – noted, and agreed. I’m not a fan of metaphysics, German or otherwise. Dignity, in the South African context, seems to me something akin to self-esteem, or ego, the size of which appears to increase the higher one’s rank in society. I’ll give you a for instance: Hhlophe’s ego is so big, it should have its own postal code. Hence all the fuss.

BTW, you and Pierre are both wrong: it’s RESPECK! (with a C, but no T)

By: Skhokho Radebe

Skhokho Radebe — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:23:01 +0000

You are always running hearings in the court of public opinion. S v Makwanyana was clear on this matter. ie that if courts were to listen to the community, then there would be no need for courts, or for the Concourt. I think your conduct in this regard undermines our judiciary in that the community makes up its mind before the court has delivered its order or heard any submissions on the matter. How then can the general public have confidence in our judiciary when you have fed them your opinion on the matter, which is sometimes disrespectful of members of the judiciary( eg your disagreement that Hlope JP is a Senior Judge) and attacks on the officers of court( Advocates and Attorneys alike. In addition, seems to indirectly try to influence what finding our courts should arrive at.

By: Skhokho Radebe

Skhokho Radebe — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:14:40 +0000

I would have though this matter is subjudice. The so-called professor must have forgotten what subjudice means. I think he must look-up the word and its application.

By: Michael Osborne

Michael Osborne — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:07:37 +0000

Clara, I have asked many people, and have yet to get a clear explanation of what “dignity” actually means.

This dilemma has horns:

*** Either, it is a fuzzy-wuzzy “ubuntu”- type thing. (In which case it means more or less whatever you want it to mean.)

*** Or, it is an impossibly obscure Kantian categorical imperative ding-in-itself.. Perhaps this would just “ubuntu,” dressed up in the finery of German metaphysics.

Maybe Pierre can explain?

***

PS: Pierre, you have made a very bad mistake, There is NO “t” in “respek”!

By: Clara

Clara — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:04:44 +0000

This dignity thing is beginning to bother me. Could it not be argued that it was Hlophe who initially infringed upon the dignity of those two Constitutional Court judges when he asked them to rule in favour of his favourite politician? After all, Hlophe suggested to them to do something that wasn’t in their job description, which may in turn be construed as undignified behaviour on the part of Hlophe. How can he then expect others to respect his own dignity?

It is difficult to precisely define the concept of ‘dignity’. Some, like ethics professor Udo Schuklenk, argue that it is meaningless, but our Bill of Rights would have it otherwise. Maybe this concept should be revisited.

By: The Big Slipper

The Big Slipper — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:26:07 +0000

Ironically Garg you may be right with that last point.

Good old Hlophe…I’ve always said, in life, presentation and timing are everything. In this case, it seems like timing is the crux of the issue. Presuming the JSC do find him guilty (which, according to his own admission he is), we will get to watch the ruling party ride roughshod over the rule of law – again. After all, which ruling party wouldn’t want a judge who is so fervently on their side that he’d abandon all sense of legality and ethics in order to serve their ends?

If the JSC doesn’t find him guilty, we’re still screwed, because based on Hlophe’s own admissions, as well as his dubious manouvering to avoid any sort of hearing whatsoever and past record of somewhat blatant lapses in ethical judgement, he seems very very guilty to say the least. So the JSC still has its credibility undermined.

Until the average man on the street realises that things like this directly impact each and every person, we’ll continue to get the government we deserve – that bunch of corrupt, nepotistic, self-serving fat cats who are currently sitting in government benches in parliment.

By: Garg Unzola

Garg Unzola — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:19:04 +0000

Of course JZ will accept a bribe. The biggest one. It’s our saving grace that he would.