If nothing else, the Supreme Court of Appeal's judgment on Schabir Shaik's submission in Bloemfontein yesterday again confirms the independence of our judiciary from political and executive influence.

The same rule of law must apply to those who implemented apartheid as to those who spent a substantial part of their lives fighting that inhumane and brutally unjust system. If this is not the case, then the fundamental basis of fairness in law will not be served.

Nevertheless, while we welcome the judgment, Shaik's contributions to the political liberation of South Africa must not go unmentioned. He was indeed a fighter for the ANC and its democratic ideals.

But with liberation comes added responsibilities, especially for those with access to money, power and resources.

The court found that Shaik abused this access to further his own interests. His "generally corrupt" relationship with former deputy president Jacob Zuma confirmed a shift from liberation hero to financial manipulator.

The judgment on Shaik should be a signal lesson to all who were once at the centre of the anti-apartheid struggle and who today continue to participate in the public life of our fledgling democracy.

In fact, they have even more to answer for than those who once benefited from the apartheid system because they are supposed to represent higher ethical standards and principles.

But ethics are about consistently upholding the values of honesty, integrity, transparency and the rule of law. Those who are found guilty of failing to do so, must therefore be prepared to accept the consequences of their actions.

While the chapter on Shaik has now been closed, the book on corruption in South Africa still needs to be completed.

Without fear or favour, our courts and our justice system must carry out their constitutional mandates. And this is to bring to book all those who selfishly use our hard-won democracy for personal gain.

Serving the people means we do so without any intent of material gain.

With acknowledgements to Cape Times.