"Unconstitutional" e-toll bill argument heard in Cape court

whatever the outcome, am not paying
 
In terms of remedy, should the application be successful, the DA said it would have no problem in principle with suspending a declaration of invalidity for up to 18 months to permit Parliament to pass the amendment act anew.
Click to expand...

The [-]DA[/-] ANC-lite getting it wrong yet again. So we're going to have 18 months of uncertainty where nobody pays etolls while the ANC forces the new act through parliament, then Nazi Alli gets his chance to literally bankrupt the entire province with fines, as he has threatened to do. My hopes still rest with the FF+ case.
 
Last edited:
Drunkard #1 said:
The [-]DA[/-] ANC-lite getting it wrong yet again. So we're going to have 18 months of uncertainty where nobody pays etolls while the ANC forces the new act through parliament, then Nazi Alli gets his chance to literally bankrupt the entire province with fines, as he has threatened to do. My hopes still rest with the FF+ case.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you read the same article that I did, because this doesn't mean that the DA supports tolling at all. Suggesting the remedy of a suspended declaration of invalidity shows that the DA are arguing on procedural grounds rather than substantive - which is exactly what they need to do here.
 
FuLL_MeT4L said:
I'm not sure you read the same article that I did, because this doesn't mean that the DA supports tolling at all. Suggesting the remedy of a suspended declaration of invalidity shows that the DA are arguing on procedural grounds rather than substantive - which is exactly what they need to do here.
Click to expand...

Procedural grounds arguments are like pissing into the wind. The ANC will force through the required acts and ignore the required public participation, leaving us in the exact same position we're in now, but with 18 months extra uncertainty. An immediate declaration of invalidity would "unintentionally" severely harm scamral and the tolls, which is exactly what we want.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
Procedural grounds arguments are like pissing into the wind. The ANC will force through the required acts and ignore the required public participation, leaving us in the exact same position we're in now, but with 18 months extra uncertainty. An immediate declaration of invalidity would "unintentionally" severely harm scamral and the tolls, which is exactly what we want.
Click to expand...

Personally, I agree with you 100%. But realistically, it looks like the DA is approaching the argument with success in mind - rather than principle. Arguing on principle is, legally speaking, like pissing into the wind.
 
FuLL_MeT4L said:
Personally, I agree with you 100%. But realistically, it looks like the DA is approaching the argument with success in mind - rather than principle. Arguing on principle is, legally speaking, like pissing into the wind.
Click to expand...

"success". As bad as it is, the status quo is better than the status quo + extra uncertainty.

Sometimes, the good guys fighting the good fight end up ****ing us more than if they'd never got involved in the first place. I still maintain that the original OUTA interdict saved scamral from embarrassment and disaster. If tolls had launched on 1 May 2012, they'd be gone by now.
 
Drunkard #1 said:
The [-]DA[/-] ANC-lite getting it wrong yet again. So we're going to have 18 months of uncertainty where nobody pays etolls while the ANC forces the new act through parliament, then Nazi Alli gets his chance to literally bankrupt the entire province with fines, as he has threatened to do. My hopes still rest with the FF+ case.
Click to expand...

I still say the most effective way to stop this is to stop pussy-footing around and organise a million-man march up to the union buildings, but seeing as saffricans prefer someone else to do their fighting for them every bit of opposition/resistance helps. Whatever the outcome, two cases are still better than one.
 
evilstebunny said:
I still say the most effective way to stop this is to stop pussy-footing around and organise a million-man march up to the union buildings, but seeing as saffricans prefer someone else to do their fighting for them every bit of opposition/resistance helps. Whatever the outcome, two cases are still better than one.
Click to expand...

^^ This ..
 
Drunkard #1 said:
"success". As bad as it is, the status quo is better than the status quo + extra uncertainty.

Sometimes, the good guys fighting the good fight end up ****ing us more than if they'd never got involved in the first place. I still maintain that the original OUTA interdict saved scamral from embarrassment and disaster. If tolls had launched on 1 May 2012, they'd be gone by now.
Click to expand...


Don't you think that stalling the etrolls is better then going full force out to stop these morons. By winning the first fight gives the DA the ammunition to attack the scamral bit by bit. This will stall the etrolls for years before they can continue raping us. In the process they will be losing millions and getting frustrated that they cannot bully us anymore
 
KOPITE said:
Don't you think that stalling the etrolls is better then going full force out to stop these morons. By winning the first fight gives the DA the ammunition to attack the scamral bit by bit. This will stall the etrolls for years before they can continue raping us. In the process they will be losing millions and getting frustrated that they cannot bully us anymore
Click to expand...

Unless I've read this wrong, that's not what they're doing. They've said that they're happy for scamral to continue raping us while the ANC fixes the legislation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter