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)
9 March 2007

Taking political accountability too far?

US newspapers revealed this week that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, failed to pay parking tickets worth $375 while he was a student at Harvard law school. He paid the tickets two weeks before he officially launched his presidential campaign.

Now its front page news in every newspaper in America. Is it only me, or is this taking accountability a bit too far. Imagine South African newspapers had to publish such detailed allegations about politicians. There will be no space for stories on crime.

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