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.
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)
What a surprise
Mushwana said the Public Protector did not have powers to conduct criminal investigations and to institute prosecutions. “It is therefore for the National Prosecuting Authority to decide whether the allegations made by Der Spiegel warrant any further investigation in South Africa, at this time.” According to Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine, Shaik, brother of convicted fraudster Schabir Shaik, was allegedly paid a US3 million (about R21 million) bribe by one of the arms-deal bidding companies.
The Public Protector does have the power to investigate corruption and then to refer the matter to the NPA for criminal investigation. Guess Chippy has friends in high places and the Wise One is not prepared to upset them. If only I could feign surprise….
