Telkom scandal -- Help needed

[stoke]

So blow the damn document up to 300% and present it before the judge - if the actual intention is to present the case, not just do some in-fighting with a judge then this will have more of an effect than all this bickering will ever have.

 

[Emjay]

Surely there are legal frameworks in place, in circumstances like this, for that counsel to approach a higher legal authority, and bring this odd behaviour of the judge to their attention?

If there are:
I would suggest that perhaps a lawyer/legal representatives reacting to this apparently odd behaviour by a Judge by effectively shrugging, and not immediately taking further steps to approach higher learned authorities, bypassing the Judge briefly, in order to call attention to his behaviour by submission of evidence to that Higher court dealing with judicial misconduct - is itself is somewhat peculiar.

In terms of the Constitution, the Judicial Service Commission (“JSC”) advises government on any matter relating to the administration of justice and the judiciary, such as complaints about judges and the appointment of judges. This assists in the right to a fair trial.

Mr Alachouzos has reported Judge Preller’s remarks about the Constitution to the JSC and the JSC responded as follows:

“The JSC noted that Judge Preller had acknowledged that the language used by him was inappropriate and had apologized for this. It was resolved that a letter be written to the Judge President of the Transvaal Provincial Division requesting him to caution Judge Preller that remarks of the kind made by him are not acceptable and should be avoided.”

IMO, it would be fruitless to report the Hounourable Judge Smit’s refusal to read the Founding Affidavit because it was not double spaced.

 

[Jedi_Knight]

The REAL scandal

I myself are a little confused about what all of this has to do with Telkom.... seems the issue is more about judges, double spacing and the constitution.

I think you will come to a different view if you read the affidavit PDF whose link has been posted by danielm on 26-06-2005:

http://www.samsra.org/16May05_MMKomane_aff.pdf [2.50 MB]

I've been following this thread for a while but have only just joined after reading the document, which left me STUNNED. I'm an ex CA (therefore financially trained), but I don't think you really need any specialist knowledge at all to understand what's contained here.

The PDF is only 10 pages long, so not too long to download. Go to the seventh page of it and start reading at paragraph 9. (The Second Defendant there means Telkom).

Start paying attention when you get to paragraph 13. Then start paying even MORE attention when you get to paragraph 16!!

See what I mean?

I think that that IS a scandal. [22,257,886 shares = about R2.5 billion]

Is this what the judges are tring to prevent from being heard? If so, why?

 

[danielm]

I think that that IS a scandal. [2,257,886 shares = about R2.5 billion]

You meant 22,257,886 shares, surely.

(Otherwise, well spotted, Jedi_Knight!)

 

[Jedi_Knight]

You meant 22,257,886 shares, surely.

Yes, I did. I've just gone back and edited my earlier post to show the correct figure. Thanks.

Anyway, it's a hell of a lot. And that's just up to October 2004 (and only through the two shelf companies already known about)?

If there's any truth at all in these allegations, and if the share-buying really took place irregularly for the kind of fraudulent purpose which is suggested in the PDF, then those allegations are DYNAMITE (or should be in SA and probably WILL be in the USA).

I wonder how many people other than Telkom and Thintana may have had an interest in all this, though, and may therefore be willing to help in hushing it all up?

 

[Albereth]

Turtle and Peapod:

Simplistically put, however, if your economy grows slower than your population increases we are becoming worse off although some individuals may not notice it. And remember that there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[neio]

I've submitted this story to www.drudgereport.com

 

[Turtle]

Simplistically put, however, if your economy grows slower than your population increases we are becoming worse off although some individuals may not notice it. And remember that there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

Yes, Albereth, I am aware of that, and it's a very good/valid point However, our population growth is currently actually stabilising (and reversing) because the second derivative of population size is currently negative due to Aids. Thus our economic growth at the moment is in spite of an effectively decreasing (or soon to be decreasing) population.

 

[antowan]

NOTICE: A SECTION OF THIS THREAD WAS SPLIT INTO THE OFF TOPIC SECTION BECAUSE IT WAS DERAILING THIS THREAD AND WARRANTED ITS OWN THREAD.

IT CAN BE FOUND HERE:

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=25520

 

[LoneGunman]

neio - just remember that matt drudge is - in US terms - although 'seen' as a genuine 'news source' - he's something of a right winger, and though it may seem to be non-partisan news coverage, he's got a bit of an agenda going..

For publicity and serious coverage, I'd suggest (as good starting points)
http://southafrica.indymedia.org/:
www.rense.com (regardless of the sometimes odd content, he gets tens of millions of hits each month. Local rightwinger jan lamprecht gets his news items up there, as does a woman in zimbabwe's weekly report - so its both sides of the political spectrum)
http://www.ap.org/ (associated press) - submit as a press release
http://www.truthout.org/
www.indymedia.org
http://cryptome.org/
http://news.ft.com/home/europe (financial times UK)
http://www.tomflocco.com/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/

 

[pimal3]

So Telkom is "skelm" as well? What else is news.
2005 0.2% Broadband penetration
2006 0.1% Broadband penetration
2007 0.05% Broadband penetration in SA, all courtesy of Telkom

 

[BTTB]

So Telkom is "skelm" as well? What else is news.
2005 0.2% Broadband penetration
2006 0.1% Broadband penetration
2007 0.05% Broadband penetration in SA, all courtesy of Telkom

Now take that and make a graph starting with year 2007 and ending with year 2005 will make it look like they actually have increased penetration.

 

[LAS]

"Correctness" of buying your own shares ...

.... But from what I understand from the quote is that you (as a company) are NOT allowed to purchase your own shares with your own share capital without a shareholders meeting?

Is this correct?

Hi Peter7,

Think carefully about your words in this post; With what money are you buying the shares ... The shareholders

 

[LAS]

Contex change in Judge Responses on Transcript

Court: Well I was going to tell you that the popular view in South Africa is that if somebody relies on the Constitution it means he doesn't have a case otherwise.

Advocate: Sir, that is part of the record of this case, if somebody relies on the Constitution of this country it means that they don't otherwise have a case, is that what you are telling me sir?

Court: Did you listen to what I was saying...

Advocate: Yes I did.

Court: I was saying that it has been said by many judges, it is a popular answer, that if somebody relies on the Constitution it means he doesn't have a case.

Advocate: Well sir I would beg to differ...

I have seen this quote quite a few times in these posts, and the subsequent discussions.
Not once have I seen mention of the subtle context change in the second response from the judge by just omitting the “OTHERWISE”.

Court: … if somebody relies on the Constitution it means he doesn't have a case otherwise.

Using the Constitution as basis and justification of your individual rights.

Court: … if somebody relies on the Constitution it means he doesn't have a case. <Missing otherwise>

Literally means the Constitution don’t give you any legal rights.

 

[Toby]

In the light of the Telkom "members register" Controversy, this thread can now be seen in a whole new light.

 

[mooK]

Wow, this must be one of the most interesting threads I've read in a while about Telkom, even though it's so outdated at this point. I've been up all night reading about it and finding similar ones. And really admire Alocos for his selflessness and patience and real passion that he's put into this effort.

Unfortunately my bubble was burst this morning when I showed that court transcript linked in the original post involving the judge dismissing everything because of line spacing to my dad who's an attorney, albeit in conveyancy at the moment, he used to do courtroom work.

I, and most of the people participating in this thread, including even Alocos (As far as I could tell) were under the impression that the judge was being unfair and just ridiculous in not reading this form because of a trivial matter like line spacing and that he could even somehow be corrupt and linked to the telkom demons.

Anyway, I showed it to my dad who was actually kinda bemused. While he read through and explained to me what each legal term meant, it became kinda clear that certain parts of the applicant's case were unprepared. And my dad told me the fact that the affidavit wasn't in the correct formatting was a really embarassing error as all documents presented in courtrooms must comply with these rules. It's needed to make it easier on the eyes to read through great loads of text and also enables the judge to make his notes in between the lines, etc and it's one of the basic rules of the courtroom. And he wasn't surprised at all that the judge wasn't willing to read it because of this at all. (maybe it happened to him too? hah)

Another thing was, which wasn't clear to me anyway, maybe everyone else understood but I didn't -- this 'firm' involved, the "SA Minority Shareholders' Association" didn't have any assets which is why the judge was wary of it being able to pay for the court costs (for wasting everyone's time for fcking up the formatting rule) and my dad said he kinda reckons that the firm was just established for the purposes of the court case alone and didn't exist outside of it.

Anyway, I'm just kinda disappointed because after reading through Alacor's posts I was really impressed with his vast knowledge of law and I thought he must be some kind of God, so willing to explain mundane legal jargon to us poor dumb folk, but sadly my bubble is kinda burst now after imagining this large conspiracy against him while it might've just been a bad mistake on his part.

Please prove me wrong.

PS. I'm assuming Alacor's in the process of more legal action right now, probably still trying to get the same kind of thing done. From what I could understand from that transcript the original motive was trying to force the registrar and telkom to provide their register of members publicly since my dad says big corporations like that have so much power that even though their register is in the public domain they've got so much clout that they have workarounds and the only real way to force it is to resort to court action.

Anyway, I appreciate your everyone involved in this amazingly selfless legal action for the benefit of the SA public. Perhaps lawyers aren't evil? Hmmm...

 

[alacos]

... my bubble is kinda burst now after imagining this large conspiracy against [alacos] while it might've just been a bad mistake on his part.

Please prove me wrong.

Hi, mooK.

I have been so busy recently that I have had hardly any time in which to follow or participate in the MyADSL forum --- so it it is really something of a coincidence that I happened to log in here today and see your message above.

Your father's comments and conjectures are not unintelligent, but they do seem to me to go considerably beyond the point of justifiable inference from the transcript which he and you have both evidently read. In any event, though, I think that --- since he is a lawyer --- his comments etc. deserve a detailed and legally-reasoned response.

If you like, I will send such a response to you (by PM or email) over the coming public holiday (Tuesday). I do not have time to do so now, as I have to draft the notices and accompanying affidavits (plus draft court orders) for two interlocotury applications tonight.

As regards any response by me here, I can only repeat the relevant part of what I said in my first posting in this thread --- which was as follows:

"I also believe that it would be absolutely wrong for me to become involved, on an ongoing basis, in an Internet discussion about litigation in which I have been (and may yet in future be) professionally involved. Besides, as an advocate I am supposed to conduct myeslf in such a way as to uphold the dignity of the court — and I can hardly do that consistently with participating in discussions arising out of a letter which clearly contains various adverse insinuations about judges. I hope that everyone understands".

That, I am afraid, must (at any rate for the time being) continue to be my position as regards participation in this particular thread. I do not believe that anything reflected in the transcript which you've read was the result of a "bad mistake on [my] part" --- though this does not mean that I think that there is necessarily a "large conspiracy" against me (or against any client of mine) --- and more than that I am simply unwilling to say on the Internet.

Michael Alachouzos
[email protected]

 

[w1z4rd]

/me watched mook closely ... some interesting posts you've done. I wish my english was as good as yours

 

[mooK]

Haha, thanks Wiz! But for all you know I could just be the new and improved Telkom SpyBot, sent here to truly infiltrate the MyADSL community and corrupt it from within!

 

[dominic]

...it had occurred to me...tough mission tho