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)
10 June 2011

CASAC joins challenge to extension of term of office of Chief Justice

MEDIA STATEMENT

10 June 2011

CASAC Challenges extension of term of office of Chief Justice

The Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC) will challenge the unilateral decision by President Jacob Zuma to extend the term of the office of Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo.

CASAC will be joining the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS) in the court action. Legal papers are being prepared and will be filed as soon as possible.

CASAC has taken this decision as the actions of the President infringe upon the fundamental principles of the Constitution including the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers. CASAC will challenge the validity and constitutionality of section 8 of the Judges Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act.

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