Regard must be had to the higher standard of conduct expected from public officials, and the number of falsehoods that have been put forward by the Public Protector in the course of the litigation. This conduct included the numerous “misstatements”, like misrepresenting, under oath, her reliance on evidence of economic experts in drawing up the report, failing to provide a complete record, ordered and indexed, so that the contents thereof could be determined, failing to disclose material meetings and then obfuscating the reasons for them and the reasons why they had not been previously disclosed, and generally failing to provide the court with a frank and candid account of her conduct in preparing the report. The punitive aspect of the costs order therefore stands.
I was woken up this morning at 5:30 by the blaring of Vuvuzela’s. I got up and was going to write something for this Blog about the judgment of the High Court which found that the Mail & Guardian had the right to access all the information regarding tenders given out by the Local Organising Committee of the Soccer World Cup. A great day for the principle of freedom of information and openness and transparency and all that important stuff.
But I put on my Bafana Bafana shirt and practiced my Vuvuzela blowing instead.
Then I thought of writing about the Human Rights Commission Report criticising the City of Cape Town for not providing proper toilets to the poor and destitute of our City, but discovered Gavin Silber had already said what I wanted to say on the Writing Rights Blog.
Soon the fever will pass, sanity will return and with it my critical faculties. Meanwhile – sorry dear readers – no attempt at insightful and critical analysis of the legal and constitutional issues of the day seems possible. Once the World Cup gets started I promise to return.BACK TO TOP