I was reading through the DA’s affidavit a little earlier. And the content of the affidavit brought up a question: could a court possibly find that Simelane is guilty of perjury (which is a criminal offence)?

I took a fairly brief look at the requisites of the offence a bit earlier and it seems as if the State could possibly make out such a case.

The immediate possible obstacle to a conviction on such a charge would be that one of the necessary allegations to show perjury is that the accused must have communicated a false statement under oath or affirmation during the course of a judicial proceeding. And the Ginwala inquiry was not a court of law. However, the matter of S v Carse 1967 (2) CPD at 663H-664A does not confine judicial proceedings to proceedings in courts of law. Thus if the Ginwala inquiry can fit the relatively broad definition of a judicial proceeding, then someone may wish to think seriously about pressing criminal charges against Simelane. And there is no rule to the effect that someone cannot at once be the subject of both civil and criminal litigation.

It’s about time we get someone who does not forget who appointed him…LOL…if that’s not transformation, I don’t know what is!

Seems to me that you are making the mistake commonly made by most of us, equating transformation to RACIAL transformation.

Transformation in this case might just mean a new “transformed” way of doing things – like not being involved in intelligence gathering activities etc … or even taking orders from political masters…LOL

All of that iwll still amount to transformation in my view. Transformation does not have to be about black or white

My question is now: What makes his appointment more transformative than, say, that of Vusi Pikoli, Mokotedi Mpshe or any other black (male) advocate (who definitely has more experience in national prosecuting matters), so that his appointment can be said to have been made with a view to “aggressive transformation”? Sounds like that whole “National Security” argument again – the last refuge for … (Khosi – I’m not saying it!)

I am not English speaking person and will never be one.

For that matter, i can speak and write proper Setswana, Zulu and Xhosa. I do not laugh to people who can’t express themselves in english, because i understand it’s not their home languange.

My massage is loud and clear.

The second misconception is that many of the more short-sighted South Africans just do not understand the nature of insidious harm. But in the hope that such harm is rendered a little clearer: a cancer is easier to deal with if it is tackled early on. The complete contempt that Zuma and his set show for the rule of law in this country is a cancer. And if we do not deal with this now, we could find ourselves in a disastrous predicament in time.

After all this noise, I wonder when was this survey done. Someone is missing the point and there is no prize for guessing who it is?