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)
20 June 2008

Thanks

It has been quite a hectic few weeks on the legal and political scene and some days I hardly had time to digest it all. I have not had time to thank all the commentators on this Blog who have kept up quite a lively, sometimes very robust and often informative and interesting debate going here. So, thanks!  You keep me on my toes and make me think and reflect about my own views.  Now if we can only get Mr Malema to reflect on his.

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