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)
7 February 2016

All the court papers in EFF & DA Nkandla application to the Con Court

Here are the papers submitted to the Constitutional Court in the two cases relating to the implementation of the Public Protector’s Nkandla Report.

DA case – Public Protector’s papers: DA 4th Resp Heads

DA case – Minister of Police’s Papers: DA 3rd Resp Heads

DA case – President Zuma’s papers: DA 2nd Resp Heads

DA case – Speaker’s papers: DA 1st Resp Heads

DA case – DA’s papers:DA App Heads

EFF case – Public Protector’s papers: EFF 3rd Resp Heads

EFF case – President Zuma’s papers: EFF 2nd Resp Heads

EFF case – Speaker’s papers: EFF 1st Resp Heads

EFF case – EFF’s papersEFF App Heads

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