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)
22 May 2009

Medical miracles (I)

It has now been 80 days since Schabir Shaik was released from prison on medical parole in order to “die a quiet and dignified death”. Shaik, however, is still very much alive. Is this a medical miracle in the making?

From now on, I will remind readers every 30 days that Shaik is still alive.

Every 30 days that Shaik remains alive provides more proof that the medical parole board released Shaik unlawfully and that the government lied about his condition. With the passing of every month, the scandal of his release grows bigger. We should not forget this.

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