Quote of the week

Regard must be had to the higher standard of conduct expected from public officials, and the number of falsehoods that have been put forward by the Public Protector in the course of the litigation.  This conduct included the numerous “misstatements”, like misrepresenting, under oath, her reliance on evidence of economic experts in drawing up the report, failing to provide a complete record, ordered and indexed, so that the contents thereof could be determined, failing to disclose material meetings and then obfuscating the reasons for them and the reasons why they had not been previously disclosed, and generally failing to provide the court with a frank and candid account of her conduct in preparing the report. The punitive aspect of the costs order therefore stands.

KHAMPEPE J and THERON J
Public Protector v South African Reserve Bank (CCT107/18) [2019] ZACC 29 (22 July 2019)
17 March 2007

With friends like these….

In response to my post on Ranjeni Munusamy and Mr Jacob Zuma, a reader of this Blog writes:

That’s bull shit!!!! You are only looking at your own angle, what do you thing of what you read on Business Day???? You are one of those people who hate JZ without a reason but full of yourself. Get lost man…

Which just goes to show, in an ethically free zone facts do not matter. But the Zuma supporters like the one quoted above would do well to have a peek at the SCA judgment in the Shaik trial. It really does make for interesting reading when your hero is Jacob Zuma. A bit like reading about the Widows and Orphans Trust when you thought R Arthur W Brown or whatever his name is, was a champion of the poor.
SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest