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)
12 September 2011

Why have the institutions of the state, the Hawks and the SA Revenue Service in particular, done nothing about Malema for all this time? Why is it that when City Press and other newspapers started raising the red flag about Malema’s wealth way back in 2009, no one lifted a finger? Why is Malema being investigated and possibly charged now? Are these investigations coordinated? We have been here before. We have seen state institutions being used for political ends. The man who alleged that President Thabo Mbeki and his administration were using organs of state to go after him was none other than Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, our current president. Zuma needs to explain to the nation whether Malema is being pursued because he is indeed dipping his fingers into places they should not be dipped, or whether he is being pursued because he has proven too opinionated for the comfort of some ANC leaders. – Justice Malala

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