Quote of the week

It is clear that no legitimate objective is advanced by excluding domestic workers from COIDA.  If anything, their exclusion has a significant stigmatising effect which entrenches patterns of disadvantage based on race, sex and gender…. In considering those who are most vulnerable or most in need, a court should take cognisance of those who fall at the intersection of compounded vulnerabilities due to intersecting oppression based on race, sex, gender, class and other grounds.  To allow this form of state-sanctioned inequity goes against the values of our newly constituted society namely human dignity, the achievement of equality and ubuntu.  To exclude this category of individuals from the social security scheme established by COIDA is manifestly unreasonable.

Victor AJ
Mahlangu and Another v Minister of Labour and Others (CCT306/19) [2020] ZACC 24 (19 November 2020)
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