Pikoli's removal: bulls hit versus legality

[NameOfBeast]

James Myburgh writes:

The ANC may possess many good qualities and attributes but an understanding of, concern for, or sensitivity to ‘national security' is certainly not one of them. The ruling party has invariably prioritised its own narrow and often venal interests over the good of the country. So what explains this sudden pressing concern when it comes to Pikoli?

...a liar makes statements knowing them to be false, and to that degree is respectful of the truth. After all, "it is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth."A bulls hitter on the other hand does not particularly care either way:

"Since bulls hit need not be false, it differs from lies in its misrepresentational intent. The bulls hitter may not deceive us, or even intend to do so, either about the facts or about what he takes the facts to be. What he does necessarily attempt to deceive us about is his enterprise. His only indispensably distinctive characteristic is that he misrepresents what he is up to."

Motlanthe did not decide to sack Pikoli because he was suddenly exercised by issues of ‘national security.' The ANC majority on the ad-hoc committee have not rubber stamped this decision because they really believed this either. They have other reasons for wanting Pikoli gone (it is not difficult to work out what they are) but they feel obliged to misrepresent what they are really up to.

If Pikoli challenges his removal in court the case is really going to come down to whether bulls hit is entitled to trump legality in this country.

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=117401&sn=Detail