Publication: The Mercury
Date: 2005-09-13
Reporter: The Editor
Reporter:
Enforcing
the rule of law and stamping out rampant crime are among the greatest challenges
that this country faces. Certainly nobody envies the difficult task of the
police, the prosecution authorities and other state bodies tasked with
maintaining or restoring law and order.
That said, we live in a
democracy, one for which many people fought and sacrificed their lives. As much
as we support their crime-fighting roles and efforts, it is unacceptable for
officials to exceed their levels of authority or to take short-cuts that
infringe the entrenched and established rights of the individual. The country
has had enough experience of an all-powerful state apparatus to wish to see any
replay of jackboot tactics.
Fortunately the courts generally have lived
up to their responsibility to protect democratic principles. A number of recent
rulings have defended the right of the individual to fair judicial
processes.
Last Friday the Pretoria High Court took steps to protect the
principle of client-attorney privilege when it ordered the prosecuting
authorities to hand back documents they seized from Julie Mahomed, a legal
adviser to former deputy president Jacob Zuma.
In seeking court
authority to conduct its raids and seize the documents the prosecutors allegedly
failed to appraise the presiding judge of her legal responsibilities to Zuma.
This allegation is now to be tested on appeal.
In general, while the
corruption allegations against Zuma deserve to be tested in court, it is
essential that this should be done in a way that he will receive a fair and
balanced trial.
Secondly, a KwaZulu-Natal judge last week called the
national director of public prosecutions to account for misusing his powers of
asset seizure by taking away property valued at R1.8 million - the equivalent of
11 years' salary - belonging to a provincial traffic officer
who faked a matric certificate to get his job *1.
While the
faking of such certificates has become a serious problem that must be stopped,
this action was like using a sledgehammer to kill the proverbial fly. As the
judge pointed out, the use of the provisions of the Prevention of Organised
Crime Act was ludicrous in this case.
While the law enforcers deserve
all the help they can get, they also need to maintain a sense of balance.
With acknowledgement to The Mercury.
*1 The man did his job for 11 years
before the authorities resorted to this tactic. Surely he must have been able to
do a reasonable job (without or with Matric certificate), or he should have been
fired for poor performance? He could still have received some sanction for
fraud, maar R1,8 million is 'n bietjie erg.
But the law is sometimes "a
ass".