Immigrants’ rights are not negotiable
Immigrants in South Africa are not powerless. Whether they are permanent residents or refugees, they have recourse to rights under the Constitution, as well as other domestic and international laws.
This author has yet to write their bio.Meanwhile lets just say that we are proud Corruption Watch contributed a whooping 3171 entries.
Immigrants in South Africa are not powerless. Whether they are permanent residents or refugees, they have recourse to rights under the Constitution, as well as other domestic and international laws.
My local councillor is being investigated for his role in corrupt tender processes in our municipality. A senior branch member of our political party told me that I should not discuss the allegations or charges because the councillor is “innocent until proven guilty”. I understand that this is an important part of criminal trials, but what is its relevance in public discussions around allegations of corruption?
An ex-California state senator pleaded guilty on Wednesday to a racketeering charge in an organised crime and public corruption case centred in San Francisco’s Chinatown.
If corruption can’t be stemmed, it will be almost impossible to stop illicit financial flows, writes Khalil Goga, because the first enables the second. Without significant anti-corruption measures on national, continental and international levels, African states will continually expose themselves to the risks of corruption and such illegals outflows of money.
Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng has rejected claims by top-level government officials that the judiciary shows bias when making certain rulings. He also stressed that court orders should always be obeyed, and that to do otherwise is to undermine the rule of law. Read his statement here.
In the third and final part of our summary of closing arguments at the Arms Procurement Commission, which wrapped up at the end of June, we read about the arms suppliers’ statements, which all said the same thing – no corruption.
In part two of our summary of closing arguments at the Arms Procurement Commission, we look at what government departments had to say. It was predictable, to say the least.
In the first of our three-part summary of closing arguments in the Arms Procurement Commission, which wrapped up at the end of June, the evidence leaders conceded that there might have been improper behaviour on the part of some arms dealers, but insisted that the equipment bought was being productively used.
Our zero this week is the police minister Nathi Nhleko, for his clumsy and opaque handling of his part of the Nkandla saga, and for not clarifying his statement that more taxpayers’ money might have to be dished out on beefing up security features. These, some would say, have already cost far too much.
