HIGH COURT RULING AGAINST DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES THAT THE MAJORITY SHALL GOVERN!!!!!

BEELD 31JULY 2013

It is reported that the chief wip of the ANC in Tlokwe said that Tuchten J's ruling in favour of the DA in the on-going saga in Potchefstroom Municipality is against the democratic principle that the majority shall govern. This person does not have the slightest idea what law is about - and to top it all, he gets paid and he is in a very powerful position. The members of the ANC joined forces with the DA to oust the mayor Maphetle Maphetle for the second time running. On the assumption that this person has a point, then it means that the ruling party can do as it likes, without fear of interference of the courts at all. Shame on you Maphetle!!!

Read More

Judge Maqubela died while having sex with call girl & THE BANGLADORE PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

 

Not how a judge should operate

The Times Live newspaper of 28 August 2012 filed this report about the Judge who was found dead in his home. His wife is on trial for this killing. The allegations that are made during this trial is a case in point about the applicability of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct for inter alia judges.

I think it is absolutely deplorable and horrendous that there these type of allegations are flying around and that against a judge. A person in that capacity should be above reproach and far, far, far above these allegations.

I remind you about our local judge who initially only had tea to drink and he crashed the Governmental Jaguar backwards nogal into a garden wall late at night: Judge Nkola Motata. It is very easy to locate this "judicial" story on the internet: google "drunk judge" and you will find it in a flash.

Read More

THE BANGALORE PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT 2002

 

Constitutional Court Emblem



This is to my mind the high water mark for judicial conduct not only for judges, but for all magistrates, chairmen of tribunals [domestic or international] and practising lawyers, be they practising advocates or attorneys specifically in the R.S.A.

You can download the PDF format of the entire document – google “the Bangalore principles of judicial conduct 2002” and you will find it. It is interesting to note that our own late Chief Justice Pius Langa who passed away on 24 July 2013 at Johannesburg was present at the first meeting held in Vienna April 2000 [he was then Deputy Vice-President of the Constitutional Court] and he was present in his capacity as Chief Justice at the second meeting held in Bangalore February 2001 where these principles were discussed and accepted as a Draft code of Judicial Conduct. His vision was not reserved for South Africa alone. He also had a vision of judges’ conduct globally. It was, however accepted during November 2002 at the Hague and has now the status of a duly authenticated international code of judicial conduct.

When you read these principles it becomes exceptionally clear that judges are human and therefore subject to normal human frailties such as bias, intolerance and partiality. This goes to the core of the administration of justice. It underscores my view that the administration of justice is not mechanical neither is it chemical. It is applied with various degrees of success by people like you and me who happened to be practising law. Medical practitioners practise medicine subject to their own human quirks and personalities – and so do lawyers or any professional man/woman.

I intend to publish short discussions of these principles on my blog. I invite you to participate.

Read More

Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng again took flak for his recent address to Advocates for Transformation. It came in the form of a letter to Business Day by constitutional law expert, Professor George Devenish, who wrote that both the content and tone of the Chief Justice’s address – made in his official capacity – have serious implications for judicial independence,. Devenish pointed out that in his address, the Chief Justice, without mentioning names, used emotional and powerful language in relation to those who are challenging the modus operandi of the JSC in relation to the way it recommends candidates for appointment to the Bench. ‘He is obviously referring to, inter alia, the Helen Suzman Foundation, which has initiated litigation in this regard.’ He adds: ‘In his address, the Chief Justice declared: ‘We must use all available avenues to expose this retrogressive campaign and the danger it poses to nation-building.’ In making this statement, Devenish argued, the Chief Justice had ‘with unrestrained and categorical language declared his allegiance with and support for the JSC, against its detractors’. He concluded that, by his alignment and support for the JSC against its detractors, Mogoeng has ‘done immeasurable harm to the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, which is a cornerstone of democracy in SA and of which he should be a manifest custodian and should not in any way undermine’.

I acknowledge my source: LegalBrief Issue No. 0076 dated Friday 19 July 2013. With thanks.

Read More

Couple got divorced to "save" their relationship!

Can you believe this lot? This couple got a divorce in the Free State High Court to "save" their relationship. The judge was in a pickle - not even as an advocate she had something like this. What to do with this? The husband told the court it is a matter of confidence - while they are married they can always threaten divorce and that creates havoc in their relationship. Does that then mean that if they are no longer married they cannot separate? The phrase 'a cock and bull story' is both permissible and apt to describe this piece of nonsense used as an excuse to obtain a divorce. I submit that there is something behind this story which the couple withheld from court.

Read More