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)
2 March 2010

Shameless canvassing for votes. . .

If you are not a graduate of the University of Stellenbosch, you can skip this post. For some reason I have been nominated as a candidate for election to the University of Stellenbosch Council by the alumni of that university. As I would be embarrassed if I get the lowest number of votes, I am hoping a few friends and readers of this Blog might vote for me. This can be done electronically. All the details can be found by clicking here. If you believe I should be kept off the Council at all cost because of my dangerous views you need not vote, of course! If  you are not an alumni of Stellenbosch University you cannot vote either.

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