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)
1 October 2012

Those in the ANC who support Zuma do not do so because he is a superb leader with an impeccable track record and unrivalled integrity. They do so because they are in a faction that benefits from his continued presidency through political power and patronage, and fear the consequences of losing their positions of privilege. It’s not as if most of those who oppose Zuma have purer intentions. Many of his detractors are frustrated by not being able to access political and economic resources while Zumanites are in control. They want their turn to control the levers of power. – Ranjeni Munusamy at Daily Maverick

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