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)
19 April 2007

More on Judges

My slightly elaborated take in Business Day on the topic of the disciplining of judges. Since talking on this topic yesterday on RSG, I had interesting correspondence from Judge Louis Harms on the topic. He suggests that there are possibly other serious problems with the proposed legislation and points to the fact that the Minister will be involved in finalising the Code of Conduct in consultation with the Chief Justice. When I have more time I will return to this topic.
SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest