Quote of the week

An ‘important purpose of section 34 [of the Constitution] is to guarantee the protection of the judicial process to persons who have disputes that can be resolved by law’ and that the right of access to court is ‘foundational to the stability of an orderly society. It ensures the peaceful, regulated and institutionalised mechanisms to resolve disputes, without resorting to self-help. The right of access to court is a bulwark against vigilantism, and the chaos and anarchy which it causes. Construed in this context of the rule of law and the principle against self-help in particular, access to court is indeed of cardinal importance’.The right guaranteed s34 would be rendered meaningless if court orders could be ignored with impunity:the underlying purposes of the right — and particularly that of avoidance of self-help — would be undermined if litigants could decide which orders they wished to obey and which they wished to ignore.

Plasket AJ
Victoria Park Ratepayers' Association v Greyvenouw CC and others (511/03) [2003] ZAECHC 19 (11 April 2003)
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