Quote of the week

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.

Mabuse J
Helen Suzman Foundation and Another v Minister of Police and Others
7 February 2007

JSC to revisit Hlophe matter?

The Cape Argus reports today that the JSC will re-open the matter of Judge President John Hlophe and the almost R500 000 he received from Oasis for “out of pocket expenses”.

Does this mean that there are discrepancies between the version provided to the JSC by Judge Hlophe (and accepted by a majority of its members) and the information that came out in court papers? Surely Justice Hlophe would not have been unwise enough to make claims to the JSC that can be contradicted by hard evidence?

My innitial response to this sorry saga has not changed.

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest