READER LETTER | ConCourt works without prejudice

The Constitutional Court must be one of the best institutions we have functioning in SA.

The recent judgment from the Constitutional Court that dismissed President Cyril Ramaphosa’s review application of the section 89 independent panel report brings to mind the EFF vs speaker of National Assembly and others judgment penned by former chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng who, despite being appointed by former president Jacob Zuma, ruled that the former president was bound by Thuli Madonsela’s remedial action to pay back for security upgrades.

The Constitutional Courtvs dismissal proves that it functions without prejudice, fear and favour. The fact that Ramaphosa is the president does not give him the privilege to avoid the high court and seek direct access to the Constitutional Court.

It is only the magistr’ate's court that does not have jurisdiction to hear matters that relate to the conduct of the president. The high court has that jurisdiction.

Despite constitutional rights issues enjoying primacy at the Constitutional Court, it was held that all issues are constitutional because they flow from the constitution and so this has affected the Constitutional Court'’s approach. As a result, if the matter is ripe for the high court, it must be decided there.

Therefore, the president like any other person who has capacity to litigate must follow the procedure.

Israel Tshetlhane, Krugersdorp, Mogale City