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.
A response to Prof Asmal’s view on the reparations case Jaco Barnard-Naudé Prof Kader Asmal’s erudite opinion (avaliable here) on why the […]
Angry appeals show true colours of business Published in Business Day on 13 January 2009 JACO BARNARD-NAUDÉ THE apartheid reparation […]
South African courts are likely to hand down several politically significant judgments in 2020. This will include cases involving Public […]
By Jaco Barnard-Naudé The controversy sparked by attorney Richard Spoor’s recent remarks which boils down to ‘I basically only brief […]
Statement by the Faculty of Law on the use of violence by SAPS 23 October 2015 The Faculty of Law […]
But let me acknowledge once more, loud and clear: I am an apartheid beneficiary. I am not proud of it. […]
The Consulate General of the Federal Republic of Germany would like to draw the attention of the Cape Town legal […]