Quote of the week

It is clear that no legitimate objective is advanced by excluding domestic workers from COIDA.  If anything, their exclusion has a significant stigmatising effect which entrenches patterns of disadvantage based on race, sex and gender…. In considering those who are most vulnerable or most in need, a court should take cognisance of those who fall at the intersection of compounded vulnerabilities due to intersecting oppression based on race, sex, gender, class and other grounds.  To allow this form of state-sanctioned inequity goes against the values of our newly constituted society namely human dignity, the achievement of equality and ubuntu.  To exclude this category of individuals from the social security scheme established by COIDA is manifestly unreasonable.

Victor AJ
Mahlangu and Another v Minister of Labour and Others (CCT306/19) [2020] ZACC 24 (19 November 2020)
27 April 2007

FW de Klerk foundation on affirmative action

Dave Stewart from the FW de Klerk Foundation responds today to my article on affirmative action in the Cape Times. It seems to me he argues from a false premise, namely that one must necessarily choose between high standards and affirmative action. This argument seems to suggest that black people are for the moment inherently inferior, which is rather unfortunate.
SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest