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)
28 February 2007

Paparazzi part of open and democratic society

This morning The Mercury newspaper reports that the prosecutor who arranged the appearance of Justice Motata in chambers has defended his action.

“It was me who asked (the magistrate) if he would be kind enough to grant a postponement in chambers, which he graciously agreed to do…If people think there is something wrong with that, they need to come to me,’ former Gauteng Bar Council chairman Nazeer Cassim SC told The Mercury.

And the current head of the Gauteng Bar Council, Gerrit Pretorius SC, agreed, saying there was nothing extraordinary about Motata’s appearance. ‘I understand that the press are probably unhappy. But you can also imagine how it must be for a high-profile person to walk into a courtroom and be confronted by a sea of paparazzi, he said, adding that he was ‘not surprised’ that the judge’s legal team had elected to meet the magistrate in chambers.

This just goes to show that being an SC does not necessarily give one any understanding or insight into the basic requirements of living in a democracy. Of course, these learned SC’s are correct that no one who appears in a criminal matter would like to be confronted by the press – whether one is Dina Rodriguez, Mathias Mathe or Judge Motata.

The point is, though, that under the Rule of Law one cannot demand or expect special treatment from the criminal justice system just because one is a judge. Moreover, the press has a right and a duty to inform the electorate of the movements of important people like judges charged with drunken driving. How many poor black defendents without legal connections have ever managed to evade the press at a criminal trial appearance as Judge Motata did?

Probably zero.

In the kind of open and democratic society guaranteed in the Constitution, even judges must face the paparazzi. If they do not, they run the risk of appearing in contempt of democratic values.

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