Constitutional Hill

Shaik release subverts the Rule of Law

The release of Schabir Shaik on medical parole is an outrage. Either that or I feel very sorry for him and his family because he is about to die a ¨consolatory and dignified death¨.

It might well be true that Shaik is ill and that he is not faking his illness (but who knows, during his trial he turned out to be a liar and a fraud, so I will not be surprised if he makes a Lazarus-like recovery in the weeks the come – bring on the cigars!), but the law is clear: unless a prisoner is terminally ill, he is not entitled to be released on medical parole.

Section 79 of the Correctional Services Act of 1998 states that “any person serving any sentence in a prison and who, based on the written evidence of the medical practitioner treating that person, is diagnosed as being in the final phase of any terminal disease or condition” may be put on parole so that they may “die a consolatory and dignified death”.

So, either Shaik is going to die any day, or the Parole Board broke the law in releasing him and are no better than those correctional services officers taking a bribe to facilitate the escape of prisoners. No, the Board is worse, because it did its work in the open – in a brazen fashion – as if the law does not apply to it and the powerful prisoner it has decided to free on no legal basis whatsoever.

Why would the Parole Board break the law and act illegally? Well, Shaik is a friend of the next President of South Africa; he is the man who gave that President millions of Rand and then got that man to do some serious favours for him to advance his business career. And if one has such important friends, why should the law stand in the way of a release? After all, what the President wants the President gets, no?

It seems the ANC cronies on the Parole Board is tough on crime if those who commit the crime are not ANC members or friends of the President of the ANC. Otherwise, they get a free ride. Join the ANC if you are a criminal and you will hardly have to wrorry about the consequences – even a 15 year sentence becomes a two year stay in a luxury hospital.

This kind of behaviour is utterly outrageous. It shows a contempt for the law that is so breathtaking and disgusting that words fail me. (Either that or the members of the Parole Board cannot read and write.)

Why would the Parole Board illegally release Shaik? Well, because they know they will get away with it and they know that powerful people in the ANC want it to happen. One law for them, and no law for ¨us¨. This kind of attitude is highly dangerous for any society and for any democracy. It undermines respect for the law and creates a cowboy society in which who you know and how much you earn decide your fate.

And when the rules are not followed by the powerful, why will the powerless follow the rules? This leads to a complete breakdown  of rules and respect for rules and a kind of crony society in which respect for rules only gets you into trouble.

In the long run such a society will make many people very unhappy because only a select few can know the right people, only a select few can get the contracts and can know the President of the ANC and can get the rules broken for them. People of principle, poor people, people who have no contacts will be forgotten in such a society and they WILL suffer.

This is why corruption and a lack of respect for the law really matters to ALL South Africans – not only to us in the chattering classes. Corruption potentially eats away at our humanity and corrupts our souls while it also destroys the efficiency of the state – a state on which poor people rely to make their lives better.

For the sake of all South Africans, rich and poor and black and white, I can only hope – maybe even pray – that Shaik is about to die a ¨consolatory and dignified death¨. Otherwise we are in for some rough times with the crooks in charge.

  • George Gildenhuys

    Prof, I hate to break it to you, but the rule of law in South Africa is a myth. Has been for quite some time.

  • PM

    We are all, of course, terminally ill. It is one of the few certainties of life–that we will die.

    But this seems, on the face of it, to be a rather stunning and flagrant abuse of power, and in the middle of an election.

    The interesting thing will be, in a couple of years, to see what kinds of pay-offs or cushy jobs, benfices or pensions, etc., those Parole Board members get.

  • H Smith

    Well, why are we surprised…? President Love Pants told reporters at the weekend that he would pardon Shaik when he gets into office….! On what basis would he do this – I would be keen to hear an analysis of this.
    How appalling is that…?
    If I was the judge, who spent so many hours, weeks, and months arriving at a resaonbly cogent and defensible argument for sending Shaik to jail, I would be furious.
    The government/ANC has effectively shown the middle finger to each and every member of the judiciary all the way from the Supreme Court to the Constitutional Court who were involved int his process, and effectively wasted their time and resources which could have been better served being used elsewhere.
    Surely, the members of the judiciary who were involved in the Shaik “process” should have some right to demand a more transparent analysis of the reason’s for his parole.
    If I was any member fo the judicairy who had had my time wasted and my views/principles thrown back in my face like this I would be furious.
    As far as I am concerned, the people involved (if it is found that Shaik is not in the last throes of a terminal illlness) should be charged with contempt of court and thrown in jail

  • Sam

    Prof, I am a big fan of your blogsite. This latest entry is just another one that gets me worked up.(in a good way, because I feel like doing something about it..) I consider myself a reasonable and rational person and would like to know if you have any advice with regards to doing anything reasonable and rational about these disgraceful and questionable actions pulled off by powerful people. What can we do?

  • Peter

    Where is Chippy? Someone needs to tell him that the Scorpions are dead and he can now safely come to the deathbed.

  • Mike Atkins

    Some points worthy of following up by all you investigative journalists out there:

    – Did Mr. Zuma know about this outcome before Monday, when the Parole Board met? Was is merely a co-incidence that he told The Weekender that Mr. Shaik should be released on medical grounds?

    – How is it that Mr. Zuma (by his own admission) spoke to officials of the Dept about this matter?

    – Which official did he speak to, when, and about what?

    – If Mr Shaik is genuinely so ill, why was he able to go home? Is he expected to die in the next month?

    – Who are the doctors who wrote the reports? Can they be prosecuted for fraud?

    – Did the Parole Board ask for an independant assessment? If not, why not (high blood pressure is not normally viewed as terminal)?

  • Anonymouse

    This outrageous incident has now created a dangerous precedent (no wonder that SAPHOR is so impressed) – and it is another nail in the coffin of the rule of law. Like Al Capone said, every man has his price.

    Mike – I believe it is no co-incidence, but clearly a matter of the Shaiks and Zuma still being very big (‘hand-om-die-blaas’) buddies. In fact, the mere admission that he has spoken to the Dept of Correctional Services in this regard, has given an indication that Zuma (and state departments!) has already decided that he is the next President of the RofSA and that he is the one that should be spoken to on these matters, not the figurehead ‘President’ that currently occupies the not-so-hot seat.

  • RvdW

    The sad truth that is emerging here is that there is a new order. The people will endorse this new order by the millions, come election day and so the writing will be on the wall.

    South Africa has lost the ability to establish a developmental state based on the rule of law. We will now become a state that will fail in developing because, as it is with all states that fail to develop, the ruling elite are above the law. This should not come as any surprise. It is very African.

    We are not seeing anything better than Yengeni, Winnie, Niehaus, Minister Beetroot, Minister Carcrash (Lekota), President Human Pig (hint: he left someone else’s property looking like a raped and assaulted ex-wife), President Quiet Tyrant and so on, simply because the ANC cannot be better than that. That is them at their best.

    There is little point in constantly winging about it. South Africans are in favour of it. Deal with the new reality. Adapt your expectations.

  • ozoneblue

    I will not comment on this thread besides saying that I totally agree with PdV when he says that:

    “One law for them, and no law for ¨us¨. This kind of attitude is highly dangerous for any society and for any democracy. It undermines respect for the law and creates a cowboy society in which who you know and how much you earn decides your fate.”

    If it turns out to be true that Shaik is given preferential treatment and he is being released illegally I would be the first one to call on Patricia De Lille to blow the cover right off this one.

  • DJL

    It seems that were all (myself included) going to be very upset if Schabir actually makes a “miraculous recovery” or turns out not to be terminally ill. So here are just a few interesting ethical questions: Will we be happy and relieved if Schabir dies? Will we all come back to this blog and admit we were wrong and say we’re sorry? I wonder.

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    in all due respect we dont know what his medical cause is….Ive heard he has cancer and has year to live….we dont know this is why it is so important that because this is a high profile individual this is in the publics interest to know what is the reason for him to be released on medical parole….

    What I am finding disturbing is this, it goes with out saying preferential treatment was given to him and ill prove this…

    Attorney Clifford Gordon, so far has leaked that the reasoning is humanitarian grounds

    Julian Knight, successfully sued Balfour in 2007 because Simon Mazibuko was in a far worse condition as he had terminal cancer and was not given medical parole

    It is estimated that only between 10 and 20 prisoners received medical parole a year. This can be confirmed by Balfour who publicly stated Shabir was one of the 20 people for medical parole

    Within those 20 people who have medical parole shabir has been placed above Jacob Kgatlane who has lymphatic cancer serving time in Cmax prison and is expected to die in a year.

    This is disgusting if shabir is realsed on the grounds of high blood pressure….how can you weigh against high blood pressure and Aids/Canser?

    There seems to have been a policy shift because of who shabir is and who he knows.

  • Mili

    Refer to:

    According to Balfour “One (of the three medical practitioners) even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition.”

    Now I don’t have any experience in the medical field, but the words ‘terminally ill’ are described by the Oxford dictionary as the last stage of a fatal disease. ‘fatal’ means ending in death. So to get medical parole a prisoner first has to have 1) a disease 2) be in the final stages of that disease and 3) die as a result of this disease.

    Now only 1 of the 3 medical practitioners concluded that Shaiks illness is irreversible. The fact that 66 % of the practisionars are confident that his condition can be reversed indicates that they are confident that he will probably not die of his current disease. He is therefore NOT terminally ill.

  • ozoneblue

    Chris Mcdaniel @ 10:26 am

    “It is estimated that only between 10 and 20 prisoners received medical parole a year. This can be confirmed by Balfour who publicly stated Shabir was one of the 20 people for medical parole”

    I’m not a parole officer and I do not know what the criteria are for release on “humanitarian grounds” . But simple logic tells me that the profile of the prisoner – i.e. potential danger posed to society would be one of those criteria.

    So white-color criminals have always been treated a little differently to blokes who are in for murder and rape for example.

  • http://webmail INAM

    oi prof

    i hope the parole board is considering giving Mathe a parole as well. when i saw him on tv he was “gravely ill” as Chippy would say

  • Chris Mcdaniel


    thats not true please read the successful case of Simon Mazibuko V Minister of Correctional Services & others

    being released on rape murder or fraud should have no bearing on who should be released first to die with human dignity. that is unlawful

    “humanitarian grounds” that seems to be the issue are not grounds for that type of special parole

    Yes you are right that critera are looked into and one would be to see if that person will be a danger to society but medical parole is a little different and the judgements are made from the doctors, if the doctors agree that a person is Terminaly Ill and is in the Last stages of life surly will not be a danger to society..agree?

  • Thomas

    Interesting debate again on this matter. How many of you on this blog have read or listened to the interview of Zuma and the pardon? Where did blogger get the information that Sheik was dying of severe hypertension and depression? Can the Prof with certainty say the members of the Parole board were ANC members? We really need investigative journalism in South Africa. I need to be convinced that the ANC and Zuma had something to do with this. But as it stands we are vultures waiting for Sheik to die.

  • Thomas

    Chris Mcdaniel

    I have to agree with you when you say:

    “Yes you are right that criteria are looked into and one would be to see if that person will be a danger to society but medical parole is a little different and the judgements are made from the doctors, if the doctors agree that a person is Terminally Ill and is in the Last stages of life surly will not be a danger to society..agree?”

    The major question is (I asked this yesterday): Was the law broken, if yes then the authorities should act. If the doctors misdiagnosed Sheik intentionally then they must be prosecuted. The law must be seen to take its course.

  • Dumisani Mkhize

    Quite interesting that only one of three doctors says the condition is irreversible. Only a bully or an idiot will therefore see this as being in deathbed and therefore qualifying Shaik for medical parole.

    If indeed Shaik dies sometime this month, then I will feel very bad for him and his family. I will not only offer my condolences but will apologize for my obvious lack of compassion. But I am betting my patootie, Shaik will be alive on Election Day, and we’ll all know what that means.

    Here’s my take on all this (yes I speculate): Zuma was going to pardon Shaik. But what would have been the grounds for such a pardon? Smart minds in the ANC saw this and immediately knew that that would be bad publicity for the new President – maybe even illegal especially when he should have been charged with Shaik in the first place.

    The big guns or their advisors saw a better option – why not use doctors – that way they will spare the President and the ANC some serious embarrassment (let alone potential legal actions).

    Very clever, but not smart because Shaik does not qualify for medical parole.

  • spoiler

    I feel really sorry for Shabby S – if he really is in the final stages of terminal illness. Rule of Law – well maybe the ANC/Gov need a lesson in what it means. They and their pal Bob M seem to think it means to make laws and to enforce and rule via them. Things like arbitrary, capricious, double standards, hypocrisy et al don’t feature in this mindset.

  • Thomas

    Dumisani Mkhize: Where did you get the informatiion that only one of three doctors said the condition was irreversible.

  • Dumisani Mkhize

    Here you are Thomas:
    According to Balfour Ngcode ‘…”One even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition.” …’

  • Chris Mcdaniel


    You are asking very excellent questions

    so tabulate everything.

    what we do know and what is speculation/what we dont know.

    Right….what we dont know is the reason for Shabir being released for medical parole. we can only suspect

    But what we do know is the history of shabir jail sentence and what we do know is he is te first south african to be given a prison sentence and sent to prison but never spent a day in prison.

    From medical reports by the MEDIA and an interview with a nurse he was given special treatment, he was not handcuffed to his bed, he “apparently” refused to eat hospital foods and enjoyed burgers and pizza’s

    what we do know is he suffered from blood pressure, depression and hypertension and chest pains

    what we do know is Balfour in a statement. said “ONE even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition”

    what we do know are the witness’s or experts on this matter
    Attorney Clifford Gordon (who represents prisoners on parole) : said yesterday Shaik’s doctors had appealed to the parole board on “humanitarian grounds”.

    This is supect shaiks doctor(s) notice the “S” so this begs the question is shaiks doctors in on this and were they the ones who gave the report for shaik to be released for parole “like going to your family doctor to get a letter so you can bunk school?

    Julian Knight: stated Shabir is being released for high blood pressure

  • ozoneblue

    Chris Mcdaniel @ 11:30 am

    Yes – I did indeed read that case and the following stood out for me.

    “whose placement on parole is expedient on the grounds of his physical condition, or in the case of a woman, her advanced pregnancy, may at any time, on the recommendation of the medical officer, be placed on parole by the commission, provided that a prisoner sentenced to imprisonment for life, shall not be placed on parole, without the consent of the Minister.”

    Medical parole for prisoners with a life sentence needs the special consent of the minister. AFAIK Shaik has not been sentenced for life, there is no direct comparison between Mazibuko who was in for murder and aggravated assault and Shaik.

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    what are you telling me Ozoneblue? Whats your point?

    the only thing that should stand out to you is the correct procedure was not taken with Mazibuko nor was medical grounds that proved he was in the last stages of his life and evidence by “NON Biased doctors” was that this not good enough infact balfour wanted a second opinion and the mere fact that Mazibuko had Aids a terminal illness was not allowed parole

    But shaik does? I really im not understanding your point your are trying to make. yes the one is in for life the other in for 15yrs but who out of those two really deserved medical parole?

  • shakira

    Jacob Zuma said that the ANC will rule until Jesus comes. I assume that it was quite easy for him to say that because in the first three elections that the country has held, the ANC won with an overwhelming majority. There has also never been any credible opposition against the ANC.

    It is also clear to me that some bloggers here have a sense of dispair because it seems to them that the ANC operates with impunity. It might seem that no matter what it does, no matter how brazen the ANC’s actions are, the voters will never punish them at the poles. It also seems that although an ANC supporter might have serious misgivings about the conduct of his party, he would still vote for the ANC out of loyalty or would rather not vote at all. This is partly so because most of our people simply do not trust the oppositon parties.

    I don’t think we should dispair. Our democracy is still very young and with every election our voters will become more sophisticated. Even the most loyal supporters are not going to vote forever for a party whose leaders willfully undermineeverything that the founding fathers of the organisation fought for. Yes, at first they will show their disquiet with simply staying away from the poles. This will at first translate into a greater majority for the ANC. But if the ANC continues on this path they will eventually start voting for other parties with the intention of voting the ANC out of power. Maybe not in this election but certainly in the next one.

    So for the ANC’s sake I hope that Shaik’s release is really above board and that there was really no interference from their side. There is a limit to what the South African voting public will tolerate.

    We will find out soon whether Shaik was really terminally ill or whether he was given preferential treatment because of his political connection to JZ.

  • Sne


    I wonder what his family must be going through after reading the wishes, and even prayers, of people for Shaik to die…

  • Pierre De Vos

    Ngcondo Balfour is quoted as saying: “The three medical practitioners’ collective submission shows a unanimous conclusion that Mr Shaik is in “the final phase of his terminal condition,” said Balfour in a statement. He added: “One even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition.”

    This does not make sense. If he is in the final phase of a terminal illness, why would only one doctor say that the condition has reached an irreversible condition? Are the other two doctors stupid or confused? The two statements completely contradict one another which means either that Balfour is very stupid and does not understand the law and what the facts actually are, or that he is lying. Or maybe not.? A terminal condition may mean that Shaik suffers from something that in maybe ten or twenty years will elad to his death but that he is not terminally ill now? Then the parole was granted illegally and Balfour is then party to this illegal action by trying to mislead the public. What we need is more information. Someone with time and money should make a request to access the information on which this decision was based as well as the reasons for the parole. A case will have to be made because this info is not going to be given out without a fight because something seems fishy.

    In our law there is no such thing as parole on humanitarian gounds – only on medical grounds in terms of section 79 of the Act and then only if one is in the last stages of a terminal illness and is about to die..

  • Cuzin

    Sad day for our beutiful country…Only 3 questions I have on my mind…

    1. Who is the Chair of the parole board?
    2. Who are the members of this parole board?
    3. What are the names of the doctors who examined Shaik.

    Once the report is made public, these questions will be answered and it will be clear that indeed anc had a hand in this matter despite their denials.

  • Thomas

    Dumisani Mkhize: so you were selective in your quoting of the article. The article says:

    Correctional Services Minister Ngconde Balfour said on Tuesday that Shaik was “in the final phase of his terminal condition”.

    “The three medical practitioners’ collective submission shows a unanimous conclusion that Mr Shaik is in the final phase of his terminal condition,” said Balfour in a statement.

    “One even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition.”

  • Thomas

    Chris Mcdaniel: you clearly did not listen to the minister on morning live

  • ozoneblue


    “This does not make sense. If he is in the final phase of a terminal illness, why would only one doctor say that the condition has reached an irreversible condition? Are the other two doctors stupid or confused?”

    Probably because doctors like other professionals often differ in opinion ? Take constitutional experts for example: same of them say that it is important that the individual is adequately protected from the abuse of power by the state, others say that it doesn’t matter as long as the victims of such abuse are their political opponents and the media takes no exception to such abuse. Its is exactly the same with doctors : they sometimes come to dramatically different conclusions , some of them are competent and as with constitutional experts some of them are quacks.

  • Pierre De Vos

    Ozoneblue, no it does not add up because the Minister says the medical practitionares unanimously concluded Shaik is in final phases of a terminal illness – yet, says the Minister – only one of these doctors thinks the condition is irreversible. Huhh?????? So Shaik is terminally ill accoprding to all the doctors. Yet two of those doctors think he can still be cured. But if he can be ciured he is not terminally ill. Unless he is Jesus, if he is terminally ill it must be irreversible! This staement is an absurdity.

  • Thomas

    Prof: Definition of Terminal illness is a medical term popularized in the 20th century to describe an active and malignant disease that cannot be cured or adequately treated and that is reasonably expected to result in the death of the patient. This term is more commonly used for progressive diseases such as cancer or advanced heart disease than for trauma. In popular use, it indicates a disease which will end the life of the sufferer.
    A patient who has such an illness may be referred to as a terminal patient or terminally ill. Often, a patient is considered to be terminally ill when the life expectancy is estimated to be six months or less, under the assumption that the disease will run its normal course.
    The statement “under the assumption that the disease will run its normal course” is very important because it emphasizes why the statement by the doctor is very important when it comes to doctors. When a doctor says “the condition has reached an irreversible condition” he means in his opinion there is no chance that the patient might be miraculously healed. People have been diagnosed as terminally ill and have survived.

  • Chris Mcdaniel


    I didnt listen to the minister this morning please enlighten me what did the minister have to say?

    “Probably because doctors like other professionals often differ in opinion ?”

    then if the doctors differ in opinion the shaiks should not have been released on medical parole then

  • ozoneblue

    Pierre De Vos @ 3:27 pm

    Agreed Pierre. It does sound like a contradiction. But you never know it may be a terminal psychosomatic condition – Shaik may miraculously recover from his severe depression if he can get back to his old self – smoking those big cuban cigars while he is snacking on champagne and caviar and relaxing in the jacuz. Snorting some classy imported cocaine through his 5 million ZAR bills can do a lot to turn him around in a snap without the necessity for divine intervention.

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    Thomas // Mar 4, 2009 at 3:08 pm

    but then thats not unanimous now is it if ONE went as far as saying bla bla bla

  • Thomas

    Chris Mcdaniel: I will say this again; normally doctors do not say a patients condition is irreversible because there are cases where patients have been miraculously healed. One of the doctors in this case is saying even a miracle wont save Sheik. Remember that the minister in the morning (the one you did not watch; and I can see the Prof did not watch too) said the doctors examined Sheik at different times and made independent findings or diagnosis. It was going to be very suspicious if they had had the same finding and wording on their reports. But I have known the Prof to believe that lawyers and judges would word their arguments and judgement exactly the same.

  • nausea

    I’ve been trying to find out who the parole board consists of, as none of the news carried any names. I found a list of the Westville parole board members here:

    which seems to indicate a Ms Adams as the Chairperson.

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    Thomas // Mar 4, 2009 at 4:33 pm

    Im not a doctor thats why i said we dont know what the medical condition is of shaiks until a report is released at the moment it is really all speculation but what balfour is saying is becoming abit suspect.

    what is becoming clear is that it seems to be shaiks very own doctors giving there submissions to the DCS

    Attorney Clifford Gordon (who represents prisoners on parole) : said yesterday Shaik’s doctors had appealed to the parole board

  • shakira


    I don’t regard it as a contradiction if only the one doctor said that his condition is irreversable. It could just be his way of emphasising that the man is really terminally ill. The others might not have deemed it necessary to state that it is irreversable because terminally ill already means that his illness is irreversable.

    What makes me doubt whether he is really terminally ill is that the type of illnesses that are mentioned are not the type usually associated with terminal illness. Stress, depression and hypertension are very treatable and manageble diseases. Unless of course the hypertension has resulted in a stroke that has caused severe damaged to Shaik’s internal organs to such an the extent that the failure of one or all of his organs have resulted in him being close to death. But then one would have expected Balfour to mention this.

    What is also making me suspicious is that Zuma was alluding Shaik’s release on medical grounds over the weekend even before he was released.

    But we will have to wait and see. Maybe the poor guy is really dying. The leaders of the opposition parties will have egg on their faces if indeed he is in the last stages of his life.

  • Dumisani Mkhize

    I am not sure what point you are trying to put across; but it does not matter if I quoted part or everything that Balfour said, the point I am making is that there is something very fishy about Shaik’s parole. In fact, if I were to analyze Balfour’s contradictory statements, I get nonsense.

    Everything points to Shaik having been given preferential treatment. If you are really sick, why do they release you from hospital?

    Another question for you Thomas: If Shaik is still alive next month, would you agree that he was not on deathbed when he was paroled? If so, would you agree he did not qualify for parole?

  • Mzo

    Thomas // Mar 4, 2009 at 4:33 pm

    shakira // Mar 4, 2009 at 4:43 pm

    I agree with you, the absurdity that Prof is talking about is not apparent to me. I agree with Shakira that “The others might not have deemed it necessary to state that it is irreversable because terminally ill already means that his illness is irreversable”. We must all remember that the reports were not completed at teh same time and the doctors did not compare notes when preparing their reports (we hope).

    Having said that, I still think that Shaik’s condition must have really changed a lot in the last 3 years or so. I remember a jolly guy enjoying his ciggar outside his house not so long ago. Amazing what a 15-yr jail term can do to you.

    As for the politicians and some of the bloggers here, I’m always amazed at the level of hypocricy that is almost always evidenced whenever there is a topical issue.

    On the one hand you have those who claim to respect the Constitution and its institutions and yet tehy continously question the bona fides of these institutions whenever a decision is taken that does not sit very well with them. I have in mind here instances where people question the allegiance of the Parole Board members when Shabir is allowed to go home of medical parole and questioning the JSC when Hlope JP is not impeached (in the Oasis matter).

    On the other hand, you have people (typically ANC members) who always remember the constitutional provisions whenever it suits them. For example, yesterday we were being told about the right to privacy and client-doctor priviledge when people wanted to find out exactly what sickness our beloved Shabir is suffering from. However, this right to privacy and client-patient priviledge did not seem to feature when we were told about Shabir’s chest pains, depresssion, high blood etc. The question I have though is who decides what medical info gets published and which does not?

    You gotta love South African politics.

  • Garg Unzola

    Terminally ill means irreversible, but irreversible does not mean terminally ill.

    Shaik is not suffering from a life threatening disease. He has a high blood pressure from all the guilt eating away at him.

  • BSM Group

    I truly don’t believe that Shaik is dying, yes high blood pressure is not a good thing to have but it can be controlled with medication, it is not life threating. How are they going to explain in 5 years time when the man is still alive, after having been released for having a terminal disease, please explain this to me??/

  • Montana

    RW Johnson, writing in Business Day yesterday (4 March) on calls the Shaik medical parole the righting a wrong. Is it true that Shaik took no benefit and is Johnson’s understanding of the law of corruption correct?


    I do not think Zuma could be blamed for pardoning Shaik and, indeed, there would be considerable justice on his side. There is no doubt that Mbeki’s state pursued Shaik merely as a stalking-horse for Zuma.

    This sort of political use of the justice system lay at the heart of the erosion of the constitutional order under Mbeki. Secondly, all that was ever proved was that Shaik had shown great generosity to Zuma over a long period of years but that he had not, actually, got anything much in return. Judge Hilary Squires argued that Shaik continually boasted of his friendship with Zuma and was keen to use that connection for his commercial gain and that there was therefore an implicitly corrupt aspect to the relationship, but this was a peculiar judgment. Even if one allows that Shaik had corrupt intent, one cannot and should not be punished for having the wrong thoughts: there had to be a concrete instance of Shaik getting corruptly paid off by Zuma — and there was no such instance. So Shaik should never have gone to jail.

    Were I president, I too would pardon him.”

  • Montana

    my mistake … Johnson was writing before the medical parole became known … and was talking about a possible pardon for Shaik

  • Chris Mcdaniel


    “and there was no such instance. So Shaik should never have gone to jail”

    Hey?? what planet are you from?

    Shaik was found guilty on two counts of corruption and one count of fraud, with judge Squires stating in his 165-page verdict that there was “overwhelming” evidence of a corrupt relationship between Shaik and Zuma. The fraud charge related to testimony by Ahmed Paruk, Shaik’s auditor, that Shaik held a meeting with him and Shaik’s financial manager, where it was agreed that false journal entries be made in order to alter Nkobi Holdings’ financial statements. The second corruption charge relates to alleged attempts to solicit a bribe to Zuma from Thomson CSF.


    On what grounds would you pardon him? it seems to me that Zuma and yourself do not Know much about law. In order to give a presidential pardon the prisoner needs to plead guilty, you can not pardon a prisoner if the prisoner keeps protesting his innocence other wise it becomes a SUPER appeal which is against the law

    “punished for having the wrong thoughts”
    theres a word called “Mens Rea”
    and a phrase: actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea

  • nausea

    So… It’s a Ms Meenaaz Adams fulfilling the role of chairperson of the Westville parole board. Haven’t found anything regarding her political affiliation yet, but I did find an interesting document of minutes kept during a meeting of the 12 parole board chairpersons.

    Also on the site is her personal cell number: 083 786 8796. Maybe some intrepid journalist could contact her and get some comment?

    The site, located here:
    has a discussion on eligibility for medical parole where Ms Adams professed not to even know the procedures that are followed to parole a person on medical grounds. This has to raise the question: what type of qualifications does Ms Adams have if she doesn’t even know parole procedure?

    Even more interesting, Ms Adams apparently stated that “some offenders would abuse the medical parole system to be released early”. Ironic.

  • ozoneblue

    Chris Mcdaniel @ 10:39 am

    BS – Squires found no such a thing. In fact he went out of his way to correct the “corrupt relationship” media invention attributed to his finding 17 months down the line.

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    ozoneblue // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:59 am

    you can try sugar coat it any way you want Shaik was found guilty on his part of a corrupt relationship, You can not deny Squires using the word “overwhelming” evidence, christ the guy was found guilty of corruption and fraud….dont try to spin doctor this, thats what the judgement was and also from the SPA, case closed. 15 yrs thank you

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    nausea // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:59 am

    what seems to be coming clear is the DCS has got policies but it would seem these policies are not be implemented correctly, for Ms Adams to state what she said, goes to show there is a sence of negligence or lack of policy implementation or control.

    Dont know if anyone watched SABC 3 News at 19:00 last night showing an inmate dying in his cell of Aids and was not granted medical parole

  • Samaita

    After watching the Youtube clip “Kibaki: I have one wife”, I must say that is one press conference JZ will not have to do!

    Was it not Francis Bacon who said the law catches the small flies while the big ones buzz through!

  • Montana

    down Chris boy

    I was quoting RW Johnston and asking whether he was right that Shaik had not received a benefit.

    You are confusing pardon with plea bargain.

    And you are confusing the US rules for pardon in particular. Our rules have not been made public, even though the DA asked for them at the time when Mbeki released 22 prisoners, one of whom went on to commit murder.

  • Garg Unzola

    Coincidence: Shaik is not eligible for parole, but gets it.

    Coincidence: Winnie Mandela is not eligible to be on the ANC candidate list, but she is.


  • Ishmael Malale

    The bloggers here are eligible to contest the ANC in elections not on this rotting blog!

    Here you vomit your disgust for the ANC for charthatic experience.

    Let us meet in on election day!

  • Chris Mcdaniel

    Montana // Mar 5, 2009 at 3:24 pm

    Of cause its made public its in your constitution, the DA wanted a reason why the said president released 22 prisoners

    “You are confusing pardon with plea bargain.”

    No i think your confused you mentioned pardon not plea bargain

    You can not plea bargian with the president wtf? that is between the state and the accused and in order to get a plea bargian one has to admit guilt which shabir has not admitted to..and will not admit to.

    so once again on what grounds would you pardon him? or plea bargian? when the a prisoner is still protesting his innocence.

  • Ishmael Malale

    You as media and cheap experts will disclose any aliments disclosed to you not anything as you please.

    The medica record is a purely personal private matter. No matter how deep the public interest, you cannot disclose the medical status of a patient without his consent for media gratification!

    The constitutional rights are being eroded by our deep seated repugnance for the arrogance of ANC leaders.

    Know we seek to pierce through the veil of secrecy without a court challenge.

    Prof you must launch an application for the review of the minister’s decision on the basis that the doctors who examined him are ANC members, Shaik’s corrupted friends, the Boards members are intellectually feeble and ANC stooges and more importantly the information on the basis of which Shaik was released is a contrivance!

    Is is the same south african media that attacked the prominent academic for resiling to occupy a position. He was roasted and he suddenly passed on and all stupid media theorists were completely ashamed of their presposterous claims.

    So far the noise is cacaphony and cheap reference to legal meaning of terminally ill without rigorous analysis of the factual matrix. The speculative and conjectural hawling does not represent public interest.

    Why don’t we attend to the public interest regarding the death penalty! almost all south africans including the judiciary want death penalty and self declared constitutional protectionists ironically defend a democracy they so dreaded in the heydays of our revolution.

    The Profs of this world must demonstrate their prowess and challenge this decision!

    The ANC does not seat on the Parole Board and had nothing to do with this case. I enjoy the law.

    Wishers of Shaik’s death you will rejoice when he dies! I wish he does not so that you can use your cheap legalism !

  • Tony in Virginia

    Write all you like. Attack one another all you like. Be defensive all you like. But time will tell.

    Six months from now, some of us will be singing a new tune, others won’t be singing at all.

    I like, many others who know that Shaik is faking illness and Balfour knwos this, will in six months from now and some months after that be making so much “We said so!” noises, in addition to some more arrogance and impunity from the ANC.

    I’ll say this again: Shaik is not dying and Malale knows it.

  • The Big Slipper

    Ah Ishmael, so many exclamation marks, so little substance.

    The man is a shyster, through and through. It is an unfortunate opinion to have of a man, but then again, he did it to himself.

    Since his medical records are confidential, unfortunately the only way we’ll ever get proof of his 33% irreversible terminal condition is if he croaks within short accord. I do not hold out much hope for this. No doubt the explanation will be something along the lines of a miracle, praise be to whoever Shaik decides.

    What will happen then? Absolutely bugger-all-nothing of course. Welcome to the new dispensation mense.

  • Garg Unzola

    Voting day? You mean, the one where ineligible ANC candidates are allowed to stand? You mean the one where a large contingent (about 10% of South African voters) are probably not going to be granted an opportunity to vote because they went overseas and will in all likelihood bring foreign currency back into South Africa?

    The results of our elections hardly prove anything. Regardless of who wins, Winnie Mandela is still ineligible to be a candidate and Shaik still got a Get Out of Jail Free card based on blood pressure. Since medical parole was granted to only 70 or so prisoners in the last year, one has to admit that this is an exceptional case – regardless of your political delusions.

  • Eggbotswana

    The minister should just release the medical report confirming that Shaik is going to die soon. Shaik can hardly complain, since we have all been told already that he is in the last stages of a terminal illness. By not releasing the medical evidence the minister invites us all to draw our own conclusions. The minister must take into account that very few people in the world would accept the word of a politician as even remotely reliable, let alone trust worthy. If he choses to hide the evidence he should understand the consequences of his actions.

  • mike

    Do not forget that a few years ago, Mbeke said that South Africa can learn a lot from Zimbabwe. It is happening

  • Garg Unzola

    Which consequences?

    If you’re part of the ANC, you can literally get away with murder. Ask Winnie.

  • Ad
  • Chris Mcdaniel

    a bit of a Shaik update,

    “Professor DP Naidoo, who said he had discharged Shaik from Inkosi Albert Luthuli Hospital four months before the fraudster was granted medical parole on the basis of reports from three other doctors.”


    The first Shaik family member to speak about his health, Yunus, described Shaik as a “dead man walking”. He added: “I use this phrase because Schabir’s heart is enlarged, his kidneys and brain have been badly affected, and he has lost about 50 percent of his sight. In other words, there has been progressive organ damage.”

    What Shaks family is describing is Hypertention



    Shaik has been in and out of hospital at least four times since his imprisonment

    Thats 4 times in 2 years

    He has spent 312 days in Hospital

    When he was discharged from hospital spent 4 months still in hospital until parole


    Hypertension is a cronic illness not a terminal Illness

    The problem with Shaiks “medical parole” is to suggest that our highly trained doctors who have monitored Shaiks condition “hypertension” in hospital for 312 days are completly incompatent

    Hypertension is a common medical condition, for shaiks heart to enlarge and failure of all of his organs and eyesight is to suggest that the doctors where negligent in the treatment of Shaik who was in hospital for 312 days

    after all, this disease can be controlled with the proper treatment.

    Most hypertensive emergencies and urgencies are preventable and are the result of untreated or inadequately treated stages of hypertension, or nonadherence to antihypertensive therapy

    No why on earth would Professor DP Naidoo discharge shaik if shaik has progressive organ damage?

  • Sue | African Housing

    I think that there is a lot more to this whole case than what we have been told, there is no ways that this man is on his death bed, he hasn’t even been in jail but in private clinics and eating take outs not even the food from there, which if he was so sick should have been which would have been healthier and more suited for his “condition”

  • Pingback: Richard Stupart » Blog Archive » An open letter to the next president of South Africa()

  • Morpheus

    I hear Shabir Shaik has been miraculously healed at one Rhema Church service. Can anyone confirm this?

  • Mpho

    A prophecy comes true! today Schabir is spotted everywhere in Durban…buying baloons, driving a BMW…and God knows doing what else

  • Daniel

    My huidige korrespondensie hieroor in die dagblaaie verwys. Ek dink na afloop van tyd is dit n gegewe dat die eerwaarde heer so gesond is soos n springbok in die Kalahari. Uitdagend wys hy n ieder en n elk n toffie. My kapsie in kort is as volg: Sekerlik word my konstitusionele reg aangetas deur omgang te moet he met n gevonnisde krimineel wie saam met my op die golfbane- en inkopiesentrums loop? In der waarheid word hierdie “assosiasie” op my afgedwing sonder dat klinkbare of oortuigde redes vir sy vrylating aangevoer kan word. Sekerlik is die persepsie daar dat oortreders van sy wetsgehoorsame burgers geskei sal word en dat dit dan ook in der waarheid sal gebeur. Waar klop ek aan om as individu om n einde aan hierdie vertrapping van wat reg is, te stop?

  • Pingback: Wouter's Blog » Blog Archive » Some pigs are more equal*()