Statute vs Statue: when judges become art critics
Kenya’s constitution says that the currency of that country ‘shall not’ bear the 'portrait' of any individual. So, when new bank notes were issued earlier this year, depicting the Kenyatta International Convention Centre with Kenya’s first president, Jomo Kenyatta, clearly distinguishable, seated alongside the building, the question arose whether the new notes were constitutional. Two of the presiding judges felt they had to solve the legal conundrum by deciding whether the bank notes bore a ‘portrait’ of Kenyatta - or if it was just a picture of a statue.
|
|
Judges critical of Lesotho Parliament's work, punt constitutional changes
 Lesotho’s current political bosses – and the country’s economy – have been dealt a new blow. The high court of Lesotho, sitting as a constitutional court, has ruled that plans for dealing with repayment of generous government-guaranteed loans made to two categories of officials, are discriminatory and unconstitutional. Everyone who was given such a loan will now have to be treated in the same way, with the government paying all remaining loans back to the bank, in full. The court also made a strong but unexpected call for constitutional changes that would ‘more meaningfully’ separate the legislature from the executive. The three judges further complained about the escalating number of cases that came before the courts challenging the validity of regulations. It was so bad that the judiciary was justified in feeling sceptical about whether parliament did its work properly in overseeing such regulations, the court said.
|
|
Kenyan judge declares Rastafarianism a religion: but what’s its history?
 On the very first day at her new school, the confused 15-year-old Kenyan girl was told to go home. She was not to return until her rastas (dreadlocks) were shaved off.
|
|
Poaching case victory highlights prosecution challenges
 Three judges of Tanzania’s highest court have confirmed conviction and sentence of a Chinese national, Song Lei, after 11 rhino horn were found in a ‘secret chamber’ of his Toyota Hilux. However, the court upheld the acquittal of three other men who were with him at the time. This follows the widely welcomed arrest, trial and initial conviction of all four as well as the tough sentences imposed on them in 2016. Among those most elated by the initial conviction were members of the Lusaka Agreement Task Force (LATF). That task force, from seven countries in the region, had worked with Interpol to bring the four men to trial. Since then, however, two appeals have reduced the success of the LATF operation in relation to the four accused, underlining just how difficult it is to secure convictions in such cases.
|
|
‘Very strange’ – high court ‘suspends’ supreme court judgment
Gama v Foot the Bill Investments
Supreme Court, Eswatini
Appeal Judges S P Dlamini, M J Dlamini, S B Maphalala, J P Annandale and Acting Appeal Judge M Manzini
Perhaps the most extraordinary feature of this eviction matter is that the High Court had ordered the operation of a judgment by the Supreme Court to be suspended. One party had brought an urgent application for a constitutional review of the Supreme Court judgment on the grounds that it was ‘patently and obviously grossly erroneous both in fact and in law’, and the High Court had ordered the Appeal Court judgment stayed pending finalisation of the matter.
Judge S P Dlamini who wrote the decision with the unanimous concurrence of his colleagues, criticised the application as being no less than ‘an appeal disguised as a review’. Setting aside the High Court order staying the judgment of the Supreme Court, he wrote:
I will be remiss if I do not mention that I find it very strange that the High Court could suspend the operation of the judgment of this court. I am not aware of any law permitting the High Court to make interlocutory orders regarding a matter whereby it is functus officio and this court is seized with the matter as a result of an appeal having been lodged.
|
|
Judiciary ‘not a rubbish dump for expletives’
Maithya v Pharmacy and Poisons Board
High Court, Kenya
Judge George Odunga
In this recusal application, Judge Odunga did not mince his words, warning parties against trying to be devious, forum-shopping and manipulating the courts.
No court should, and particularly this court will not, succumb to attempts by parties appearing before it to browbeat it into submitting to rehearsed stratagems for reasons best known to them. Parties who set out to unjustifiably malign and tarnish the judiciary and judicial officers by making allegations which are completely baseless for their selfish aggrandisement ought to be told in no uncertain terms the institution of the judiciary is not a punching bag for every Tom, Dick and Harry and ought not to be turned into a rubbish dump for spewing all manner of expletives. If the 3rd interested party/applicant herein thought that by employing such chicanery, he would hopefully get another bench outside Machakos that would make an order favourable to him, then he is barking up the wrong tree. In this case he has simply caught the wrong end of the stick.
|
|
A tool for justice: The cost-benefit analysis of legal aid
An estimated 5.1 billion people around the world – that is about two of every three alive today – have no meaningful access to justice. That in turn has horrific consequences, trapping people in poverty and inequality. It impacts most strongly on women, children, minorities and people with disabilities. And, of course, where there is no real access to justice, the risk of conflict and violence within a society escalate. What to do about the situation? Legal aid programmes are an obvious answer, yet policy-makers in many countries prove sceptical about whether the costs are worthwhile. This downloadable report by the World Bank and the International Bar Association entitled: ‘A Tool for Justice: the cost benefit analysis of Legal Aid’ argues that cost benefit analyses from around the world make a persuasive case showing that the benefits of legal aid and related services ‘significantly outweigh their costs’.
|
|
About Carmel Rickard
Carmel Rickard has written about the law, human rights, justice, judgements and judicial matters for many years. A former legal editor of The Sunday Times, South Africa's biggest newspaper, she is now a columnist on legal issues.
|
|
|
|
JIFA is a partnership between the DGRU at UCT, the SACJF and ICJ-AFRICA, which provides university-certified short courses to judges in Africa.
|
|
|
|
|
