Quote of the week

As seductive as certain perspectives of international law may appear to those who disagree with the outcome of the interpretative exercise conducted by this Court in the contempt judgment, sight must not be lost of the proper place of international law, especially in respect of an application for rescission. The approach that my Brother adopts may be apposite in the context of an appeal, where a court is enjoined to consider whether the court a quo erred in its interpretation of the law. Although it should be clear by now, I shall repeat it once more: this is not an appeal, for this Court’s orders are not appealable. I am deeply concerned that seeking to rely on articles of the ICCPR as a basis for rescission constitutes nothing more than sophistry.

Khampepe J
Zuma v Secretary of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector Including Organs of State and Others (CCT 52/21) [2021] ZACC 28 (17 September 2021)
14 February 2011

The problem with cronies is that they always have to eat first. Again, ask Hosni Mubarak. No matter how straight your face is when you approve your five-year plans and your growth paths and your job-creation schemes, there’s always another priority. The cronies. They’re the ones who need Transnet to build track to their mines today . They’re the ones who want this person appointed to that position. A quick special meeting before the main meeting. They’re the reason you can never truly throw yourself at any problem, just in case you get in their way. The cronies are a direct tax on the poor. Zuma can’t see it because his only direct experience of money is getting it and not making it. It’s almost not his fault, but I won’t patronise him. He is responsible for his actions and he makes his own choices. – Peter Bruce, in Business Day

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