1. Regarding the constitutional matter, I fear people are missing the forest for the trees. I have said that we have a constitutional crisis & it emanates from both amendments. It is that a Real Madrid or Barca player cannot choose the referee for El Classico. Let me explain.
2. All the judges of the superior courts are parties to the proceedings. They cannot properly sit as referees in a matter in which they are involved & they have an interest. In short, they are all conflicted. This is the forest. All the other technicalities converge here.
3. Now, some may argue that a special panel can be chosen to do it. Fine. But someone has to choose that panel. That cannot be done by players in the game because they have an interest. The JSC unnecessarily dragged itself into the matter when it could have stayed neutral.
4. This means as a party to the proceedings it is also conflicted. Our law allows the President to appoint acting judges but ONLY to the High Court & not to the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court. The CJ is disabled, so is the Actjng Chief Justice & her Deputy.
5. So we do have a crisis at the moment, notwithstanding that there is an appeal or even assuming that the Constitutional Court has a role. This is the nub of the matter; of the constitutional crisis. Those who have a role are fatally conflicted. Illegality will breed illegality.
6. A constitutional crisis occurs when the existing constitutional arrangements are no longer able to lawfully resolve a dispute in a manner that produces legality. In my opinion, this is where we are. I warned of this weeks ago, but no one was willing to pay attention.
7. I’m happy to listen to anyone who has an ingenious solution to this constitutional conundrum. But let me say this, some scientists say nature abhors a vacuum, using the wisdom from Aristotle. The politicians need to find a political solution to this conundrum. Done.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
