Comments on: National security? Then why is the President not stepping in?

By: Friend

Friend — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:32:54 +0000

Ozone for once I agree with something you said, now do us all a favour.

By: spoiler

spoiler — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:05:54 +0000

Must say I haven’t read much worthy of a riposte from PdeV on this thread. He’s simply pointed out yet another example of the double standards amd hypocrisy of teh government and ruling party – pretty hard to argue with really.

I mean, should he respond to O3′s first comment? I for one won’t trust JZ regardless of whether he is acquitted or not – there’s too much other stuff on him – the very dodgy morality, hypocrisy, the populist mumbo jumbo etc. He’s a con man who’ll say whatever he needs to to win an audience, take money for favours and hell knows what else…

Did you think JZee came out of his rape trial looking like someone you’d trust your sister, or for that matter, mother with?

By: ozoneblue

ozoneblue — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 21:18:24 +0000

I don’t think there is much use posting here if PdV doesn’t defend his posts. Anymore.

By: The Big Slipper

The Big Slipper — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:46:01 +0000

I like the way the ANC thought it was fine to plea bargain with criminals when it was their MPs who were getting the plea bargains, but are outraged when the plea bargain goes against their loyal cadres…

It really is a case of if you agree with them you’re right, if you don’t you’re wrong…based on nothing more than the fact that you disagree with them…

By: Roch

Roch — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:24:59 +0000

the ANC is one big joke. anybody who cant see that this party is run by a bunch of crooks and ethically challenged opportunists, is truly beastheaded. finish klaar.

By: Sne

Sne — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:10:18 +0000

Good post Prof.

By: Garg Unzola

Garg Unzola — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:27:00 +0000

That’s very nice of Hellen, but who is going to read it to Mr Zuma?

By: koos

koos — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:39:21 +0000

Open letter to Jacob Zuma on his candidacy for President
Dear Mr Zuma
Before your legal team makes representations to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) tomorrow, I request that you put your ambitions aside and act in the interests of the country and the Constitution by publicly stepping down as the ANC’s presidential candidate.
Rather than creating a “bad precedent”, as you told your supporters outside the Pietermaritzburg High Court earlier this month, the withdrawal of your candidacy would set an excellent precedent.
It would demonstrate to your fellow South Africans – the people whom you aspire to lead – that real leaders place national interests ahead of personal interests. It would send a clear and powerful message that political leaders must be held to account; that their conduct must be beyond reproach, and their probity must be beyond suspicion.
Above all, it would match in deed your recently-stated commitment to upholding the Constitution and the values that underpin it. If you were to be elected President by the National Assembly without having been exonerated of the charges against you in a court of law, that would seriously undermine the Constitution. In fact, I have been reliably informed by senior members of the bar that your election could be challenged in the Constitutional Court. That is because your presidency would create a conflict of interest between your constitutional role as Head of State and your status as an accused in a matter that has been brought against you by the state itself.
Until such time as you are cleared in a court of law, it is impossible for you to serve your country as its President with any hope of being able to discharge the obligations and responsibilities that all of our presidents have to undertake in terms of the Constitution.
To use a soccer analogy: If you were to become President while still Accused number 1, you would find yourself simultaneously in the same position as the Chiefs’ striker (President) and the Pirates’ goalkeeper (Accused).
The rights of an accused to take on the might of the state in defending himself are incompatible with the obligations of the Head of State to run the country properly, accountably and in a manner responsive to the needs of the people. It is quite intolerable for our state to proceed criminally against its own Head, a Head who is well placed to fund or not fund the prosecution, to influence decisions regarding the state’s stance in appeals and processes, personnel and procedures in the case. As Head of State you appoint the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP). This is akin to the Pirates’ goalkeeper nominating a Pirates’ player to take the last shot for the Chiefs in a penalty shoot out in the cup final.
Although your candidacy may well be an own goal for the ANC, you must withdraw it now for the sake of our constitutional order.
The NPA currently has 18 charges pending against you, many of which were laid for the first time at the end of December 2007. If you do not stand trial on these charges a pall of suspicion will hang over every move you make and every decision you take in the future.
You may have noticed that in mature democracies, unresolved allegations of impropriety send politicians into early, and sometimes temporary, retirement. Yet, you have chosen to pursue your political career (and presidential ambitions), despite the fact that you have not publicly dealt with the serious and varied allegations the prosecution thinks it can prove against you in a court of law.
Your trial must go ahead. Once the criminal proceedings are finally over, you can re-enter the world of politics, unless any sentence imposed precludes you from doing so. However, until then, you are trying to play for both sides at the same time. You can’t. Nobody can. It’s illegal and irrational. Any vote in Parliament in favour of your election as President is open to legal challenge on the basis that it would be invalid for want of consistency with the Constitution.
It is also politically and morally indefensible to persist in your candidacy under current circumstances. Presidents have to work in the political world of perceptions as well as the legal world of facts and rules. And so you must do the right thing and step aside until your innocence is proven in a court of law.
It is not feasible for you to run the country from the dock in Pietermaritzburg. So, in the interests of our country and its Constitution, which you now say you revere as the supreme law, stand back from politics until the criminal case is properly finalised.
Yours sincerely
Helen Zille
Leader of the Democratic Alliance

By: William

William — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:35:06 +0000

“I really can not understand why it is so difficult to understand that the ‘ANC’ had to strike a deal with criminals to convict the commissioner.”

substitute ‘ANC’ with ‘NPA’

By: William

William — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:32:34 +0000

It is dispeakable the manner that the ANC is abusing the law and the constituion to their own ends. The ad hoc parliamentary comnittee dealing with the Pikoli issue could not return any other vote but one that favours their boss. This is the nature of party politics. The ANC decided that pikoli must be fired and cadres deployed to parliament must adhere to this instruction. The committee was thus a sham or rubber stamping, whatever you want to call it.

I really can not understand why it is so difficult to understand that the ANC had to strike a deal with criminals to convict the commissioner. There is only one commissioner, who should be beyond reproach. I think it is unacceptable to society to compromise on the sanity of this office. If we must make deals with criminals to protect the office so be it. The only standard is that this must be done with integrity.

It is also very common practise to use information of criminals by way of plea bargaining and in some instances even becoming a Sec 204 witness and totally excused from prosecution if the judge finds you to be honest and forthcoming. The reason is that with organised crime it is only the syndicate members who can link certain people in other words the testimony of people who are guilty of crimes themselves are needed to convict other people.