yeah, exactlyYet Andile is still at large
yeah, exactlyYet Andile is still at large
"It's a call to say if a black man stole a packet of beans, he would have been arrested in public, but people like Markus Jooste, who robbed in public, it is okay for them to not to be arrested. Why? What are we waiting for? No, things should change," he added.
If the black mans name is Jacob Zuma he can steal 270 million from the public and people still elect him. None so blind as those who refuse to see.
Not at all, they are nowhere to be found when some white farmer runs amok and runs people over with a tractor or a Hilux. I don't remember them saying anything to condemn the action of the two coffin guys or rushing to be the first to comment in condemnation of many other cases involving white people. But hey I know how you guys feel about these things, I have never expected anything.
did he make any paintings of jz getting head?Are you ignorant or just ****ing dumb.
The part about bias is not true.
The judgment also contains important points regarding the purpose of damages. Sutherland said the amount of R150 000 in the Sparrow case had gained “notorious default status”, but having read the judgment, he could not determine “why the sum was thought appropriate”.
There had been no assessment of Sparrow’s financial standing, and the sanction did not seem related to whether she could or could not afford to pay it. He said the amount seemed “a thumb-suck intended to serve as a measure of society’s indignation”. This approach he called “crude and undeserving of endorsement.”
“Imposing the payment of sums of money which may be ruinous to a respondent does not achieve an outcome the Equality Act encapsulates,” he said. These “huge money payments” were “counter-productive” and did not serve to rehabilitate.
Velaphi Khumalo is fortunate his case landed before Judge Sutherland. And while some may perceive it unjust that he was not made to pay higher damages, the ruling instead calls into question the heavy-handedness of other sanctions that have recently been meted out.
More importantly, however, the case is a victory for the rule of law and the fundamental right of individuals, whatever their race, to be treated equally before the law.
And while Khumalo’s counsel were representing their client, their argument that the words did not amount to hate speech is highly questionable. What is most concerning, however, is that the LRC – a well-funded and leading human rights organisation – made submissions that might have contributed to devastating jurisprudential consequences had they been accepted. In particular, their argument about the identity of the target group of these kinds of utterances.
OKOKOK
Hell no, nothing as sordid.
He's still elected by people though isn't he?We dont vote for individuals as President.
One could argue that ANC MP's can nominate anyone and vote for them.He's still elected by people though isn't he?