The Law is Brandishing Racist Batons(1)

8/10/2019 The Law is Brandishing Racist Batons(1)

1/23

Private Bag X63, Rivonia, 2128 - Tel 011 807 2042 - Fax 011 807 0766 - Email [email protected] - www.apartheidmuseum.org.zaMike Stainbank: Founder - The Apartheid Museum | Registration no: 2009/007114/07

MR DON MACROBERT

NEDBANK/OLD MUTUAL: Edward Nathan & Friedland (Pty) Ltd.

Law Consultants and Advisors

Sandton - Johannesburg

03 October 2014

Mr MacRobert

The Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic. You appear to suffer the

erroneous view that the South African Judiciary is the supreme law of this Republic.

Some judges have a similar delusion, which leads them to believe that statute is

subject to their racial bias. The Constitution is the supreme law and the judiciary is

under obligation to uphold that law. Judgments based on the delusion of power,

rather than the oath-of-office are null and void.

You must stop parading the abuse of judicial power to us while we are struggling to

secure justice that is ideologically distinct from that of our heritage as a

dispossessed people. Ours is a search for justice through the rule of constitutional

law. Equality for all remains explicit in the promise of that 1996 Constitution of the

Republic.

The conduct of the Krok brothers, Gold Reef City Casino (GRCC) - while enjoying

the privilege of a public licence, is both fraudulent and a racist act of dispossession.


2/23


3/23

wished to use the name FREEDOM PARKbut the ANC requested them not

to use that name (which is now used in Pretoria as you know) and so our

clients, with the blessing of the ANC adopted and used the name The

Apartheid Museum

While this belated confession demonstrates that there is no honour among thieves,

our greater concern is that it occurs within the context of a constitutional state,

exercising the provisions of The Gambling Act. Was this the arrangement that

induced a corrupt Registrar of Companies to ignore the legal precedent set by the

success of Krok/Salmon/Southwood in 1988?

Mr MacRobert: you have not explained your personal oath dated 01 February

2012:

I point out that according to what he instructed me, Advocate Bizos (who is a

Director of The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park) has never

had any dealings with the Kroks and neither them nor any of their companies

are involved with The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park.

Mr MacRobert, in 2002, you were the instructing attorney, working for

NEDBANK/OLD MUTUAL plc Law Consultants and Advisors when GRCC (Reuel

Khoza as Chairman) averred under oath.

. . . the initiators of the project were Messrs Solomon & Abraham Krok, who,

apart from being the founders of my company, which trades as Gold Reef City

and Casino were also the initiators of the Section 21 Company known as The


4/23

South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park. and in the same

affidavit:

At the outset however, I wish to confirm that the organization that actually

trades as The Apartheid Museum is an entirely separate entity (from GRCC)

namely, a company registered in terms of Section 21 of the Act, with effect

from 14 August 2001 under number 2001/019108 under the name of The

South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park.

Have you shared all of this with your correspondent attorneys?Have you shared the

inception documents that the Registrar of Companies stubbornly refused to release

until the Public Protector intervened? Knowles Husain Inc. will have us believe that

their records have been destroyed. Please share with them the full file in your

possession. This is material information.

GEORGE BIZOS:

George Bizos is one of the Founding Directors of Freedom Under Law(FUL). This

group of women and men tell us that FUL exists to promote democracy under law

and to advance understanding of and respect for the rule of law and the

principle of legality . FUL was lauded in the media when they went after Western

Cape Judge President John Hlophe. Constitutional Court Justice Kate O Reagan got

the ball rolling and the impeachment of the first South African Judge in 100 years

became the flagship project of George Bizos and FUL. Some say it is coincidence

that the target of their constitutional consciousness is a Black Judge.


5/23


6/23

Christopher (or Christian) Kroese, Kim Feinberg, Sidney Abramowitch, John Kani,

Christopher Till, Richard Moloko, and (maybe) Lesego wa Lesego. George Bizos

and his co-directors are on record in the SCA and the Constitutional Court. Their

instructing attorney is Don MacRobert assisted by Advocate Owen Salmon.

The critical question is whether George Bizos ever was, in truth and in fact, a

Director of The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park on 14 and/or

15 August 2001. Kroese, among others, has no such recollection.

(See attachment: LOOKING FOR GEORGE BIZOS)

The racist ethos that is the Krok brothers and their Gold Reef City Casino is now a

part of the George Bizos legacy, as it is that of Rueul Khoza, NEDBANK, OLD

MUTUAL plc, and, among others, South African media. Sunday Times 02

December 2001:

The Apartheid Museum as a concept was conceived by business tycoons

Solly and Abe Krok. . . the project was conceived four years ago by

business tycoons twins Solly and Abe Krok, as a carrot to be dangled before

the Gambling Board in the hope of securing a gambling licence for the Gold

Reef City CasinoCharlotte Bauer

The Gauteng Gambling Board (GGB) with Jacques Booysen as CEO, know full well

that the carrotwas FREEDOM PARK. The judiciary, at the request of the Casino,

time and again, kindly agreed not to interrogate very many disputes in the facts.
http://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/looking_for_george_bizos_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/looking_for_george_bizos_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/looking_for_george_bizos_03-10-2014.pdf


7/23

DR REUEL KHOZA:

As a tactic, racists, in pursuit of the dispossession of black property, generally use to

good effect, the inherited pathology of the slave. Reuel Khoza is touted by all and

sundry (including himself) as the one Black who has more integrity than other Blacks.

The 2002 King Report on Corporate Governance has Khoza as Chairman of

Integrated Sustainability Reporting:

Governance in any context reflects the value system of the society in

which it operates. Accordingly, it would be pertinent to observe and to

take account of certain African Personality Fundamentals in this

context, (some of which include, among Africans) - a mentality of

inherent trust and belief in fairness of human beings. This manifests

itself in the predisposition towards universal brotherhood, even shared

by African-Americans.

As Chairman of the Kroks Gold Reef City Casino, these 15 years later, Khoza can

eventually account for the inherent trustthat we depended on. I know Reuel Khoza.

As Chairman of ESKOM, he bought bronze sculptures out of my 48 page full colour

concept document.

While working on the King Report on Corporate Governance, Reuel was also

overseeing the theft of my philosophical content and concept under the trademark:

The Apartheid Museum.

(See attachment: DONT INTERRUPT - WERE STEALING)
http://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/do_not_interrupt_were_stealing_03-10-2014.pdf


8/23

The GGB, with Jacques Booysen as CEO, although cited in litigation kept this

material document hidden deep at the GGB. He too has since been rewarded. See

attached business interests as listed by CIPC.

Now, as Chairman of NEDBANK and a Director of OLD MUTUAL plc, Reuel can

confirm whether George Bizos was in truth and in fact a Director of The South

African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park. Does NEDBANK/OLD MUTUAL plc

have a client by the exact name as the non-transferable cheque demands? It takes

a bank teller less than one minute to do that check. 60 Days have passed and Reuel

Khoza of NEDBANK and Patrick O Sullivan, Chairman of OLD MUTUAL plc cannot

answer this very simple question.

(See attachment: NON TRANSFERABLE - NEDBANK)

Notwithstanding the Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA) a total of R310,409.05,

remains unexplained by Dr Reuel Khoza of NEDBANK/OLD MUTUAL plc.In order to

overcome suspicions of aiding and abetting money laundering and/or terrorism,

NEDBANK must confirm or deny the bank tellers version: We do not have such an

account. And then comply with FICA. Threats are too typical see NEDBANK

attachment.

NEDBANK 2000 ANNUAL REPORT: The acquisition of Edward Nathan &

Friedland at the end of 1999 contributed to enhanced dealflows in the corporate

finance area during 2000.
http://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/non_transferrable.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/non_transferrable.pdfhttp://www.apartheidmuseum.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/non_transferrable.pdf


9/23

The rich pickings off Gold Reef City Casino business was one of those deals.

Chairman of NEDBANK, a lofty title, at first glance appears to be fair reward for the

GRCC business. Advanced students of racism will argue that it was, from the outset,

a poisoned chalice. We cover this temptation in our work on racism and the

inherited pathology of the slave. Racism mutates to accommodate change. The

illusion that flies under the banner of Black Economic Empowerment is one such

mutation. Life has come full circle for Khoza. He now stands in the eye of two storms.

As Chairman of Nedbank, he (and co-directors) must account for what they did at

Gold Reef City Casino. NEDBANK/OLD MUTUAL, firm of Law Consultants and

Advisors, in turn, must account for what they did on behalf of their clients: Gold Reef

City Casino. A perfect storm 13 years in the making will test the integrity of Reuel

Khoza.

GEORGE BIZOS; if he honestly wants to advance an understanding of and respect

for the rule of law and the principle of legality, could ask FUL to investigate how

Justice Brian Southwood got to hear a case involving his former clients, Abe and

Solly Krok. (They manufactured skin whitening creams that dehumanised Black

people under the racist, colour coding system of apartheid. This wealth funded

GRCC. (See: DR REUEL KHOZA GRCC & NEDBANK )

GEORGE BIZOS; if he honestly wants to advance an understanding of and respect

for the rule of law and the principle of legality, could have FUL investigate how

Southwood J, condoned the conduct of the Kroks on the exact same infringement

that he (Advocate Southwood) argued and won on their behalf in the Appellate


10/23


11/23

ACTING JUDGE GERRIT PRETORIUS:

When far too many have a vested interest in killing the evidence and the litigation

case which we have endured for the past 13 years; there is one other abuse of the

legal system to end my search for justice, and, in the process defame me. On the

word of George Bizos of The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park and

the Kroks GRCC, under the leadership of Khoza, Acting Judge Pretorius has obliged

and declared me a vexatious litigant.

On Tuesday 23 October 2012 at or about 15.55hrs Acting Judge Pretorius had made

up his mind and, in open court made the following statement: Thank you very much

Mr Salmon. I will give judgment tomorrow morning 09:30 subject to the

stenographer being here because it will not be a written judgment. If you could

just have someone to come and note because I will give an oral judgment.

On the morning of Wednesday 24 October 2012, my family and I were dressed

and ready to go to court when my attorney called to say that Acting Judge

Pretorius (or his office) contacted him. Pretorius AJ will deliver his judgment on

Friday 26thor Friday week one of the two I cannot recall. Acting Judge Gerrit

Pretorius, eventually had Justice Claassen hand down judgment on his behalf on

the 21stJuly 2014 23 months later

Jeremy Gauntlett (SC), like George Bizos (SC) is a founding Director of Freedom

Under Law. Applying for one of three posts in the Western Cape High Court in April

2010, he was interviewed at the Judicial Services Commission. When asked, he said


12/23

he was "enormously troubled" by the delays he had witnessed in the delivery of

reserved judgments. Judges should be held to account if they delayed rulings for

longer than a month.

Gauntlett is a former Chairperson of the General Council of the Bar. In this context,

the news report says that the panel discussed the fact that Acting Judges, drawn

from the ranks of the bar were among the worst offenders. He was then asked

whether repeatedly delaying judgments for years did not amount to impeachable

gross misconduct or incompetence. "I'm afraid it does,"replied Gauntlett. "Ultimately

it's a betrayal of trust. You are there to give an answer."

In December 2007, Advocate Johan Trengove, writing for the ADVOCATE

addressed the same subject from another perspective:

Acting judges do not enjoy the same independence that permanent

appointees are required to cultivate. The latter must sever all professional

links, speedily recover all fees owing and organise their personal and

business affairs so as to minimise the potential for conflicts of interest arising

in their work as judges. Not so for acting judges

Advocate Johan Trengove continues:

This exposes them to the possibility of conflicts of interest at every turn,

conflicts of which the litigants appearing before them may not even be aware

in those instances in which the acting judge is a stranger to the litigants and

their legal representatives.

Southwood J and Advocate Salmon, for anybody observing, had never met until that

worrisome Friday 20 June 2003. And, believe it or not,there is no recording for the

proceedings of that day in court. After underlining the untruths written into his


13/23

judgment; inspired by Charles Pillai, I began deconstructing the Southwood

judgment. My research and investigation led me to Hollywood Curl vs TWINS where

I found Advocate Southwood and Attorney Salmon working together to stop

Hollywood Curl (Pty) Ltd from infringing the Kroks trademark. Trengove is right, one

never really knows. I bet you knew Mr MacRobert. (Faulty pagination was a smart

move)

Trengove speaks of Principle 15 and 16 of the Judicial Ethics Guidelines for Judges

of South Africa which was endorsed by the JSC in 2000. Advocate Trengove and

constitutionally minded judges advise that it is better to err on the side of prudence,

for it is not only actual bias that is to be avoided but its mere appearance.

Now that the reader of this document has a fair idea of all the personalities

involved, allow me to give you an insight into the mind of Acting Judge Gerrit

Pretorius. These are the certified words of the court proceedings on 23 October

2012. Please take note that this statement is made in open court BEFOREmy

legal representative has said one single word to support the affidavit which I

wrote and endorsed.

[Mr Carls] You make a very serious allegation against very influential

people and well respected people involved with Apartheid Museum

that has been involved right from the outset and the allegation that

you make in a Court is that fraud in operation. I take a very, very

dim view of this . This is not how officers of the Court deal with this.

Now you can deal with your application around this. I saw it in your


14/23

heads and I did not have the affidavits and I did not know what you

were talking about. So this is the affidavit, now deal with the

allegation of fraud. (my emphasis)

My attorney (Carls) has never made a single allegation of fraud against any

influential people. Mike Stainbank, the client, for 13 years has made and

substantiated allegations against people who, I am led to believe are all equal before

the law. (I cannot understand why Acting Judge Pretorius says that he did not have

the affidavits. Throughout the hearing, he and Advocate Salmon speak of him having

read the papers.)

Nevertheless, the 23 months that Acting Judge Pretorius, took to deliver his

judgment, gave George Bizos and his co-directors ample time to bring an urgent

application to the High Court. Case Number: 14590/2013 is constituted by a total of

567 pages. It includes lengthy transcripts of radio interviews. (They needed the time)

Bizos as SC for many political activists in the time of apartheid will no doubt have

first-hand knowledge of how financial asphyxiation, stands as one of the central

pillars of the racist stratagem. (These 567 pages will cost the Stainbank family a

gang load of money in legal fees) The Bizos and Khoza group were dominus litis. In

23 months they never once approached Pretorius AJ. Big rush now to get the

appeal heard !! !.

Led by Attorney Don Macrobert, assisted by Advocate Owen Salmon, under the

(brief) circumstances outlined above, they sought and secured an interim court order

against me. As I understand it, The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom


15/23

Park, the entity, feels aggrieved by the suggestion that it is a liar, a thief, a fraudster

and a racist.

In our education programme on racism and the inherited pathology of the slave,we

discuss the matter of institutional and systemic racism. Racism exists for the sake

of dispossession.Skin whitening creams, as one example, dehumanises, first, the

individual. The person is dispossessed of her/his intrinsic godhead. I use the word, in

the sense of source of all human life. But, because the impairment (or attack)

affects only Black people, and, because it occurs within the context of White

Supremacist oppression, it dehumanises and dispossesses ALLBlack people. The

Black Consciousness Movement worked hard to explain how this cultivates, among

Black people, the pathology of selflessness. The scale and scope of colonialism and

apartheid, the slave trade and genocide, the sheer brutality, adds to the racists

desired effect.

The most debilitating end of this selflessness will be the victim who sees assimilation

with, and support of, White Supremacist oppression as the only means of survival.

Systemic and institutionalised racism can run smoothly without management. And it

invariably does have Black people actively involved. If, for any reason, there is a

glitch; a threat to the smooth running of the status quo, the principals of

dispossession - the White Supremacist - will step in, identify the threat, and execute,

corrective measures.


16/23

We have ample history to show how effective this has been through successive

White legal systems, over the past 400 years; all of them insisting that theirs was a

cause for justice.

Historians will concur that in South Africa, the Broederbond, as a secret cluster,

identified threats to the status quoand implemented the (always brutal) corrective

measures. Invariably communicated as the Afrikaner Broederbond fosters two ill-

conceived perceptions of racism. The first is that English speaking Whites are less

racist.Whatever that may mean? The second fallacy is that English speaking White

Supremacists do not have secret clusters through which they perpetuate their own

inhumanity.

Tentacles of the Broederbond and other secret clusters, with intent, cultivated very

deep roots in institutions and infected everything with their racist doctrine. Key points

were church, media, police, military, police and judiciary. The retention of the South

African Judiciary in the political arrangement of 1994, some argue was practical at

the time. In 20 years though, our current legal system, even as it concedes systemic

and institutionalised racism,has not developed a filtering tool. The assumption that

the oath of office will override the racist mind is fallacy. As but one example,

notwithstanding all these many King Reports on Corporate Governance, price fixing

in JSE listed companies is proof of unchecked racist dispossession; the racist mind

at work. The wanton killing of mineworkers is another.

These 13 years in litigation have been very helpful in the development of our thesis

on racism and the inherited pathology of the slave. Our case model on secret


17/23

clusters and racism in the South African Judiciary is founded primarily on the

conduct of all involved on the other side.

Far too brazen, they walked through every court with a supernatural perception of

thejudicial discretionthat will be exercised. If we had succumbed to Southwood J, in

2003, we would never have been able to draw on that past to question what we, in

our investigations, have unearthed in all these years leading up to this day in 2014.

Fraud is like that. Almost all the disputes in the facts can be answered by Reuel

Khoza and his co-directors at Gold Reef City Casino.

Everybody willing to listen, (that excludes an inherently racist South African media)

knows that The Apartheid Museumwas a registered trademark of full force and

effect on the Register of Trademarks on 14 August 2001.

The law does not operate retrospectively. This being so, nothing other than fraud, or,

conduct ultra vires the statute could have secured the incorporation certificate for

The South African Apartheid Museum at Freedom Park on 14 August 2001. We

know this because the legal principles of stare decis, "maintain what has been

decided" is well established in our law. Only outside of these existing rules does a

judge have the power to exercise discretion.

This legal principle is emphasised by Corbett CJ in Catholic Bishops Publishing Co v

State President & another where the maxim of stare decisis stated in constitutional

terms as follows:

The reluctance of this Court to depart from a previous decision of its own is

well known. Where the decision represents part of the ratio decidendiand is a


18/23

considered one (as is the position in this case) then it should be followed

unless, at the very least, we are satisfied that it is clearly wrong. Today it is

recognised that the principle that finds application in the maxim of stare

decisis is a manifestation of the rule of law itself, which in turn is a founding

value of the Constitution.

Where an express statutory prohibition forbids incorporation, legal precedent

demands that an entity which relied on incorporationultra viresto accumulate benefit,

to the detriment of another, should be given the appropriate legal treatment. A similar

situation occurred in Zimbabwe, in the matter of The Daily News. Chief Justice

Godfrey Chidyausiku denied the applicant the right of audience before the court on

the basis that it had not fully complied with the law by choosing not to register as a

media house notwithstanding the fact that the applicant was challenging the

constitutionality of that same requirement that it was now being compelled to fulfill

before it could properly come before the court. (my emphasis)

There is no juristic person created when there is no statute that allows incorporation

of a company, using another persons trademark without the written authority. Jon

Roland of The Constitution Society concurs with the decision of Chief Justice

Godfrey Chidyausiku:

All courts are creatures of statute law. Their jurisdictions are prescribed either

by the statutes creating them or other statues conferring upon them

jurisdiction in specific cases. For a court to exercise jurisdiction it does not

have is to arrogate to itself a statutory birth-right which it has not, and to which

it cannot lay claim. The essence of nomocracy, the rule of law, is limitation of

the discretion of officials, and providing a process by which errors or abuse of

discretion can be corrected.


19/23

Two extracts from the Louisana Law Journal succinctly make the same point:

A de jure corporation is one created in substantial compliance with all

mandatory conditions precedent to incorporation. Its existence is usually

immune from even direct attack by the state. AND The courts have no

freedom to protect the associates when the express requirements of a statute

are disobeyed and liability is expressly imposed.

Whenever I speak of racism in the South African Judiciary, I make the point that the

Trademarks Act, makes provision for any person (with an interest) to apply for the

expungment of a trademark at any time. Now, there are far too many versions on

how and when GRCC came upon the trademark, The Apartheid Museum. Let us,

for the sake of this conversation, concentrate on what they told Justice Brian

Southwood, under oath, in November 2002.

To make sure that the museum would be well received not only by

government, but the many communities that make up the South African

population, representatives of various bodies and communities were invited to

attend a meeting as long ago as late 1999. . . . It was in that process and

during meetings in late 1999 that the name Apartheid Museum was

generated. (3 participants have submitted sworn affidavits against this

version)

My concept brochure was placed in the public domain on 24 September 1998.

Khoza, as Chairman of ESKOM, received my brochure about November 1998, and,

after visiting our offices purchased bronze sculptures that appear on the front cover

of the brochure titled: New Landscape New Images.The ESKOM cheque payment

on the sculptures is dated 13th May 1999. The trademark The Apartheid Museum

is mentioned 75 times in the brochure.


20/23

Against this background, GRCC, under Reuel Khoza, brazenly states under oath:

In all the consultations which we have had with members of the community

and other organizations, referred to in paragraph 11 above, no party ever

referred to any other person or any organization using the expression

Apartheid Museum;

Thats Dr Reuel Khoza for you. But the second point I seek to make is that, even as

Gold Reef City Casino, as early as 1999, made the decision to thieve the copyright

content and the trademark The Apartheid Museum, they made no attempt to

expunge the trademark in the years they had available BEFORE their launch in

November 2001. They went ahead and, according to one estimate, spent

approximately R100M on their edifice. They took the risk notwithstanding the Kroks

personal knowledge of the law as it relates to the protection of trademarks. They

went ahead and named their offensive racist structure The Apartheid Museum.

Nobody in their right mind would take such risk unless there were guarantees in

place. Relying on the generational poverty of Black people; the financial inability to

sustain civil litigation, is not enough. Throughout, they were just too brazen and, by

far, too perceptive.

Mindful of the Friday matter, the entire case file, read with the judgment of

Southwood J, may explain what Pillai meant when he said:

Piercing the judicial veil to go beyond the paper rules that appear on

judgments is a complex task. However, one thing is clear and that is that no

executive minded judge from the previous order can be trusted to give a

judgment that would embrace the new order. It is not difficult for such judges

to give official grounds for judicial decisions to sanctify the true undisclosed

reasons. Legal language is often expressed in forms which too often obscure

the conservatism on which such decisions are based. The window dressing


21/23


22/23

Advisors. With these many judgments secured, surely, the matter is all sewn up?

Vexatious litigant and the interim gag order: what more do we need, they reason?No

need to explain Bizos or anything else.

Also, the other leg of the racist stratagem, has worked well. They will be told that

Stainbank is now without financial resources. NEDBANK, must just sit tight; to hell

with FICA, money laundering and terrorism. If they drop the ball now and return the

R310,409.05 as claimed, Stainbank will feed his family, and return to the arena.

Hlophe JP, in 2005, speaking of racism in the judiciary is correct when he says that

those who fall prey to the legal system lose respect for the law. FUL expresses

similar sentiments; a deep concern that the very legitimacy of the institutionis under

threat. No South African wants to see the judiciary reduced to a cesspool of racist

malfeasance.

George Bizos can bring balance to the scales of justice. This time it has nothing

whatsoever to do with his legal acumen or the iconic stature that he has garnered

through his lifelong contribution to, and respect for, the rule of law. It has everything

to do with his innermost personal integrity. It has everything to do with meeting the

exacting constitutional standard that he and Freedom Under Law, have claimed and

demanded that others follow.

____________________________

Mike Stainbank

Founder: The Apartheid Museum


23/23

. . . more/

P.S.

THE LEGAL PRINCIPLE OF ULTRA VIRES Mail and Guardian 02 OCTOBER

2014

(The legal principle of stare decis)

Mark Shuttleworth wins landmark case against Reserve Bank

The supreme court found that the imposition of the 10% levy was inconsistent with

sections 75 and 77 of the Constitution and invalid, and it was ultra viresin that it was

beyond the legal power of the treasury to impose such conditions on the export of

capital from South Africa. It therefore set aside the decision of the Reserve Bank to

impose the 10% levy.

The Law is Brandishing Racist Batons(1)

Documents

Transcript of The Law is Brandishing Racist Batons(1)