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)
19 May 2010

Debate invitation: “The Constitution does not reflect the moral views of the majority”

THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT ADEQUATELY REFLECT THE MORAL VIEWS OF THE MAJORITY

PROPOSITION SPEAKER ONE: EUSEBIUS MCKAISER SPEAKER TWO: AUBREY MATSHIQI

OPPOSITION SPEAKER ONE: NICK FERREIRA SPEAKER TWO: MAZIBUKO JARA

– Eusebius McKaiser is a political commentator, columnist & associate at the Centre for the Study of Democracy; studied and taught philosophy & formerly ranked one of the top 20 debaters in the world.

– Nick Ferreira is an overqualified lawyer: Oxford PHD in philosophy (Rhodes scholar) and Unisa LLB; currently a law clerk to Justice Edwin Cameron & formerly a World Debate Championship semi- finalist.

– Aubrey Matshiqi is a senior researcher at the Centre for Policy Studies and a weekly columnist for Business Day; one of the top political analysts and media commentators in SA today.

– Mazibuko Jara is Senior Researcher: Law, Race and Gender Research Unit, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town and a PhD Candidate: Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape

THE DEBATE: The majority of South Africans are morally conservative. Any poll on issues such as abortion, the death penalty, gay rights or spanking kids shows this to be the case. And yet the constitution and constitutional court judgments are very liberal. On moral and social issues, there is therefore a giant gap between the values enshrined in the constitution and what most of us think, feel and believe. In this debate we ask whether or not the constitution adequately reflects the moral views of the majority. Does it? Do come along, be entertained and engage!

WHEN? 31st MAY 2010

TIME? 530pm for 6pm

WHERE? GIBS BUSINESS SCHOOL, MELVILLE RD, ILLOVO, JHB

MODERATOR: Joe Roussous (Wits Debate Union)

RSVP: KATIE MCNALLY ( mcnallyk@gibs.co.za )

Drinks and snacks served afterwards

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