Quote of the week

The unhappy fact that it is journalists, investigating organs of state and officialdom and the political class and their involvement in corrupt practices to loot the State’s resources, who, by so doing, attract the attention of powerful and influential persons who are capable of suborning the apparatus of the State to smell out their adversaries, cannot be ignored. The examples of abuse of the system have been addressed elsewhere in this judgment. Moreover, the respondents’ perspectives assume that the designated judge is not lied to and is diligent… In my view, in the absence of a rebuttal, this example illustrates a grave vulnerability in RJCA that such an apparent abuse could occur. The common cause examples of blatant lies being told to the designated judge further exacerbates the vulnerability of the system.

Sutherland J
Amabhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC and Another v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others
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