Quote of the week

[T]he moral point of the matter is never reached by calling what happened by the name of ‘genocide’ or by counting the many millions of victims: extermination of whole peoples had happened before in antiquity, as well as in modern colonization. It is reached only when we realize this happened within the frame of a legal order and that the cornerstone of this ‘new law’ consisted of the command ‘Thou shall kill,’ not thy enemy but innocent people who were not even potentially dangerous, and not for any reason of necessity but, on the contrary, even against all military and other utilitarian calculations. … And these deeds were not committed by outlaws, monsters, or raving sadists, but by the most respected members of respectable society.

Hannah Arendt
Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on The Banality of Evil
14 December 2006

Langa vs Moseneke

In The Union of Refugee Woman and Others v The Director: the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority and Others, Chief Justice Pius Langa voted with the minority. While Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke voted with the majority.

This is not the first time since Justice Langa’s appointment as Chief Justice that he has not been part of the majority.

During the nine years that Arthur Chaskalson was Chief Justice he hardly ever was on the losing side of a case. Court watchers said that his strong personality and his ability to build consensus helped him to carve out a majority for his position in most cases. He was therefore the leader of the court in every possible way.

Chief Justice Langa is a less forceful personality than Justice Chaskalson and it does not seem as if he has stamped his authority on the court in the same way as his predecessor. Maybe that is a good thing because we will get more debate between judges?

I am intrigued by the question of whether Deputy Chief Justice Moseneke is not emerging as the kingpin of the post-Chaskalson Court. He does have a very strong personality and is an effective manager. I think his opinions will become more important as the Court changes in the next three years.

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest