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)
13 January 2009

No comment….

The SA Communist Party said it was convinced that the “persecution” of Zuma was a “politically inspired affair”.

Cosatu does not believe however that today’s judgment changes the basic facts, which are that it will be impossible for the ANC president to have a fair trial given the long delays and the trial by media,” it said.

“Cosatu remains convinced that the whole prosecution process has been politically motivated and will continue to demand the dropping of all charges.”

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