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)
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