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)
4 February 2007

Arms deal: now Chippie Shaik implicated

Chippy Shaik, former head of government acquisition in the arms deal and brother of convicted fraudster, Schabir Shaik, was paid a $3m (about R21 million) bribe by one of the arms deal bidding companies, Germany’s on-line newspaper Spiegel reported on Sunday.

According to the newspaper internal documents of Thyssen Krupp – a German company that supplied South Africa with war corvette ships – has revealed that Shaik had requested the bribe in 1998.

Questions about the arms deal just does not seem to want to go away. When the history of the rise and fall of the ANC is written, the arms deal will warrant more than a footnote….

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