The dude is spot on. The Constitution Court by granting direct access to Zuma was the author of the script that denied Zuma the right to appeal. As the Apex Court, they ipso facto brought finality to the matter.
What I am getting from Justice T a that the constitutional court should not have entertained Zondos application in the first place as they did not have penal rights. They simply shouldn’t have handed unappealable sentences.
@@theonlynapeYes, the matter was addressed. This being the apex court with the authority of finality. She is undermining original constitutional jurisdiction of their court thus intending to undermine the body of jurisprudence which they are part of.
@@theonlynape he should just maintain calmness and persistantly batress his point. If you've observed, judges don't behave like magistrates, except a few like Ratha.
Judge T is standing up for every South African. The majority made a judgement greatly influenced by political expediency. The law cannot be static or arbitrary, certain issues or judgments must be rehashed at every opportunity. Judge T may not have the legal majority on her side but she has the moral high ground. She is able to see the danger in the previous judgement for future litigants. Her question on whether there is any other case Adv T and team can hang their case on is very telling of the atmosphere prevailing in the Zondo/ Zuma proceedings.
I give my sister Justice Theron flowers and non-alcoholic red 🍷. Justice Theron my school Sisi Kampempe, Zondo and Umakoti WaseStellenbosch. Thembeka is a hired attorney for IEC but he has found his match in Justice Theron. I know for the fact that Adv Mpofu is trashing all the legal platform and assernal thrown to uBaba.
Those who drew up the constitution had to consider the applicable law at the time of compilation. As she said, no individual rights have been denied. Exactly what he is stating, zuma's rights have not been denied.
This is awesome. Justice T wrote minority judgment previously. She cannot now sit and keep quiet. This is pure difference in opinion in the viewpoint and interpretation of the individual justice/s. . Adv T could have toned down without having to have been told by the DCJ. But this is gr8 stuff. 🤟
In a profound ruling that resonates deeply with the complex interplay between faith and law, a High Court judge was summoned at midnight to make a pivotal decision. A father, guided by his religious convictions, had asserted his right to refuse a life-saving blood transfusion for his dying daughter. The judge, weighing the principles of legal ethics against personal beliefs, overturned this religious assertion, thereby safeguarding the young girl's right to life. This case underscores the critical importance of allowing legal professionals to operate within their realm of expertise, free from the sway of personal emotions. Things armchair critics knows nothing about.
My very first time to listen to both great minds Ngcukaithobi and Mpofu, i painfully say that Ngcukaitobi isn't substituting enough his arguments. It seems his defense arguments are driven by emotions.
She's driving at exposing the JUSTICE FLAWED law provision's, applicable discretionary (through majority rule) instead of argument’s merits and demerits, something that leaves us with different rules for different people before our courts. Differing rules that premise our faith as citizens before the courts on "majority" discretion than on probabilities beyond reasonability of doubt. This bothers on whether anyone else will ever be allowed to take a “contempt” (not an interpretation ambiguity) case straight to constitutional court in this land, except for Zondo. This might be besides the point on the current case, given the previous judgement; But, that previous judgement is riddled with contradictions that are going to haunt the CC for decades and centuries to come. As a stupid precedence was effected because of PERSONAL SCORES TO SETTLE AGAINST A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL BY THOSE WHO REGARD THEMSELVES AS THE GUARDIANS OF THE “SYSTEM”.
Ncukaitobi is deliberately dodging and steering clear from a direct response .He keeps referring to the Ccurts ruling, and he dithers and dives and neglects to answer a basic pointed questions as he knows very well the Ccourts ruling was malicious and neglected fundamental law prescripts
that provision is self defeating and begs for further interrogation. If one provision says to forfeit a right to appeal and one confirms the right appeal, they cant both be given full effect on the very basis of contradiction
Bravo adv Ngcukatoibi, student of law, no howling n threaning judges but sterm firm in principle of law, period, so ppl must not be irritable with facts of the law
Hcçcvcchcchçcvjviç chocoholics čhhçcvvhçcčuihfgfhioccihugigufgcccghhggu chic hc hi gghfuuiciihfhu C Bhv ouchhhhuhhhiohhuchhhuugcugc u hhuicchuhfh ihvcchucoufhfhihufuhhgghfugfhifhfuufiffghhhfhfhfh high chin ouuhuuccohvcchuhuhuochhucvhhuhuhhcuhcohchuhuhgufgfhvughfifhhf good yhuychh I bounce hugs ihufucuiuhhchucihhhgcgcuigicicg ugogo h h hug cucuucughghufufuhgguggfhuhhf h h hchuhuggfihgfug C C hhhufhfiviggvh iughfhuhhugiuuugghugghfuhuuhufofuhfuufuhuhhuhugiuh Uff fhgvughhhufhhghhhfhucg G hhhhuffufuhogh h ihvhfivhguufiffhuhfugfgfiufihgifg UFS uhoghigicug UFSuhhhfuuhugghuhuhhgfcuhi Higgs hi ouu hi chi vcuguufuhgohoufuvvcihichuh g h chçu c g cuicJayhawks G h icing ugh icuchugigicuhgihuhc gibi CBC C h chi
You guys are so obsessed with English as if it puts food on your table. In this case how does mastering his English benefit him,cos am sure that even the most uneducated person in that room can speak a bad English but make a valid point of communication.
Was Justice Theron trying to get the Adv. to ignore the ruling the Con-court had made re Zuma as though it doesnʼt hold any significance?? Strange indeed and excellent work by Adv. Ngcukaitobi
If I was Ngcukaitobi I was going to be irritated by Judge Theron trying to re argue the same case where she and judge Madlanga had a minority judgement. Zuma was asked to do submissions to the Constitutional Court and he refused.
Apply the law equally to everyone it does not matter if is the majority judgement . How come the majority judgement is not tested to see if its within the law...this majority rule is not good when not tested against the law,even in the parliament its being misused we have seen this many times.
Good debate by both jurists but the decision of the Constitutional Court is binding. Unfortunately the Constitutional court was not supposed to entertain Justice Zondo's application for contempt as a court of first instance . They were supposed to approach the high court so as to give effect to the appeal procedure.
It is interesting that the court's imposition or this contempt of court only applies to Mr Zuma not Mr Koos Bekker when he refused to come to the commission. Sebasabani abelungu? Or they gave the judges something as well that they impose the same sanctions that are imposed on us blacks if that's the case then this law thing is unconstitutional
Koos Bekker was not summoned by the State capture Commission if he had then you will have a valid argument, Botha was found guilty by Magistrate Court & won on appeal at the High Court on on technical grounds.
Zondo was quick to sentence Zuma but he didn't give him a chance to appeal,.,..why didn't they sentence those who refused to go give evidence in the T.R.C what has changed are there Zuma laws in this country.now i believe that Zuma is dieing for all blacks in this country trying to protect it against the puppet controlling the state.... God is on hour side rise Africa rise it's now or never.we love you baba uzama
The constitution provides the denial of appeal! Yet there is a right to direct access - in other words mr zuma could access the concourt directly! Zuma is appealing which has been denied. Which God is on your side? Maybe you should read the bible if you truely believe in the Lord God Almighty, it is repeatedly said God abhors sin which includes lies, deceit, corruption, etc. Why do u think God repeatedly turned away from israel since coming out of egypt, because of sin, idol worship and serving other gods, pagan gods
Judge Theron is not disputing a sentence was passed by the CC and that its binding. She is merely interrogating the fact given so the judgement was passed certain aspects of it was overlooked and will alway come back to bite the law and its interpreters. Rights engraved in the constitution were overlooked/violated and this needs to be corrected 😂 there is no escaping it
My biggest worry is that Zuma is 1 foot in the grave and out of expediency the CC Judges forgot their judgements are binding on future judgements where Zuma wont be present. The Zuma conviction elevated the CC Judges above the Constitution and their hate, pride and myopia is not allowing them to right their wrongs to cure future constitutional crises.
But when another judge and court has decided, and we refer to that judgement, we did our job and we are right, and we have a court judgement to back it up. So what are we going to do about that judgement? Act as if it is not there? Don't we refer to judgements in the South African law? If it was wrong, who is to blame? The advocate?
This debate is clear, the constitutional Court erred in Zumas judgement and if not rectified legislatively the highest court in the land is setting or has set a bad precedent.
Then the Constitutional Court shouldn't have passed a sentence in this regard, but should have instead referred their contempt ruling to the High Court (which has sentencing powers)to decide on the sentence for the contempt of the Constitutional Court.
Where does the concourt get the power of penal jurisdiction to impose an original sentence? That is the crux. It must not be so. Concourt may do nothing but interpret and refer back to lower court.
It's not uncommon for individuals of African descent to resort to emotions and employ strawman arguments and fallacious attacks when their intellect falls short. This phenomenon persists regardless of the level of education attained by the individual. I find this observation rather intriguing and worthy of contemplation
Adv Thembeka is fighting a loosing battle but his hopes are pinned in J Theron making a small error in enterpreting the constitutional laws which is highly unlikely though.
![[ICYMI] 'We won't work with ANC under Ramaphosa' - MK's Nhlamulo Ndhlela](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n4V1UhuRfyY/mqdefault.jpg)
Whatever the case ,I just love listening to Advocate Ngcukaitobi.
Its an excellent debate to both. Tough questions and probes from JT and so smart feedback from the Thembeka. The African boy is top shelf material
And so the Judgement quietens all the noise we hear around here
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Yes😅@@mokubung
Theron judge you are perfect
The dude is spot on. The Constitution Court by granting direct access to Zuma was the author of the script that denied Zuma the right to appeal. As the Apex Court, they ipso facto brought finality to the matter.
This debate was interesting...say what you like, Ngcukaitobi's is smart.
He’s brilliant⭐️.
He destroyed her
The case is not even about his IQ.
I thought I was alone on this one. The guy is good.
Very smart he knows court make mistake and they must leave with it
Judge Theron, God bless u🎉
The respect that they give to each other is on another level
It was a very robust deliberations by both Advocate Ngcukaitobi and Judge Theron.
No, Ng was rude; unprofessional
What I am getting from Justice T a that the constitutional court should not have entertained Zondos application in the first place as they did not have penal rights. They simply shouldn’t have handed unappealable sentences.
Exactly, I was shocked when I heard that Zondo used the Concourt for a matter that needed to be dealt with in the magistrate court.
Too late, majority rulling disagreed with Justice T, already, and she reopening the initial trial. That's why SC is irritated
@@theonlynapeYes, the matter was addressed. This being the apex court with the authority of finality. She is undermining original constitutional jurisdiction of their court thus intending to undermine the body of jurisprudence which they are part of.
@@esilevinichronicles4269It is her own opinion of the law no one is undermine
@@theonlynape he should just maintain calmness and persistantly batress his point. If you've observed, judges don't behave like magistrates, except a few like Ratha.
Thank u Justice Theron
But much respect to both these great legal minds
Judge T is standing up for every South African. The majority made a judgement greatly influenced by political expediency. The law cannot be static or arbitrary, certain issues or judgments must be rehashed at every opportunity. Judge T may not have the legal majority on her side but she has the moral high ground. She is able to see the danger in the previous judgement for future litigants. Her question on whether there is any other case Adv T and team can hang their case on is very telling of the atmosphere prevailing in the Zondo/ Zuma proceedings.
I give my sister Justice Theron flowers and non-alcoholic red 🍷. Justice Theron my school Sisi Kampempe, Zondo and Umakoti WaseStellenbosch. Thembeka is a hired attorney for IEC but he has found his match in Justice Theron. I know for the fact that Adv Mpofu is trashing all the legal platform and assernal thrown to uBaba.
I love you Justice T❤
Heading is misleading, there is no heated exchange here. It is just the fact-finding exercise to find the common ground of judicial departure.
"Let me finish my question please" . "My apologies"
Justice Theron is a great Judge
Judge Theron , I like her way of probing answers
Justices Theron knows her job
Too much 🙌🙌
But she's surrounded by the Hyenas, who protecting individual interests allegedly, i don't see her winning 🤔
Thank you Judge Theron, God help you in your career.
She's so hopelessly wrong, it's not even funny.
She lost her argument twice before
Ngcukaitobi is fearless.
He isn't intimidated
But is empty in his arguments
Those who drew up the constitution had to consider the applicable law at the time of compilation. As she said, no individual rights have been denied. Exactly what he is stating, zuma's rights have not been denied.
His right to appeal was denied😂😂
Good argument between the two
Very balanced facts💯
This is awesome. Justice T wrote minority judgment previously. She cannot now sit and keep quiet. This is pure difference in opinion in the viewpoint and interpretation of the individual justice/s. . Adv T could have toned down without having to have been told by the DCJ. But this is gr8 stuff. 🤟
Advocate Ngcukaitobi disingenuous and he knows it. Denial of RIGHTS not unlawful ????. SHAME on Ngcukaitobi.
In a profound ruling that resonates deeply with the complex interplay between faith and law, a High Court judge was summoned at midnight to make a pivotal decision. A father, guided by his religious convictions, had asserted his right to refuse a life-saving blood transfusion for his dying daughter. The judge, weighing the principles of legal ethics against personal beliefs, overturned this religious assertion, thereby safeguarding the young girl's right to life. This case underscores the critical importance of allowing legal professionals to operate within their realm of expertise, free from the sway of personal emotions. Things armchair critics knows nothing about.
I like Adv Tembeka Ngcukaitobi but I don't agree with him on this one😂....he's wrong!
😅@@thandosisilana425
Ngcukayithobi is a grinding stone
He is way too smart. Justice Theron is continuing with her arguments from the initial case where she made the minority judgement.
My very first time to listen to both great minds Ngcukaithobi and Mpofu, i painfully say that Ngcukaitobi isn't substituting enough his arguments. It seems his defense arguments are driven by emotions.
❤❤❤❤❤❤
The Judge is asking a question her own court has already ruled on. I don't get whre she's driving at
Yes she's trying to show that a lower court/ electro court was right because they were wrong.
@@siphosakhemajola9136 plus she supported a minority judgement against the jailing
She's driving at exposing the JUSTICE FLAWED law provision's, applicable discretionary (through majority rule) instead of argument’s merits and demerits, something that leaves us with different rules for different people before our courts. Differing rules that premise our faith as citizens before the courts on "majority" discretion than on probabilities beyond reasonability of doubt. This bothers on whether anyone else will ever be allowed to take a “contempt” (not an interpretation ambiguity) case straight to constitutional court in this land, except for Zondo. This might be besides the point on the current case, given the previous judgement; But, that previous judgement is riddled with contradictions that are going to haunt the CC for decades and centuries to come. As a stupid precedence was effected because of PERSONAL SCORES TO SETTLE AGAINST A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL BY THOSE WHO REGARD THEMSELVES AS THE GUARDIANS OF THE “SYSTEM”.
Ncukaitobi is deliberately dodging and steering clear from a direct response .He keeps referring to the Ccurts ruling, and he dithers and dives and neglects to answer a basic pointed questions as he knows very well the Ccourts ruling was malicious and neglected fundamental law prescripts
Great leadership DCJ
Emotions are not the reason one loses a legal argument.
Advocates are usually this frustrated when they know it’s not a win.
Some people are here to praise nonsense
This was not necessary though, the Judge does not want to let it go,
She is spot on
According to this advocate the judges of CC have a right to change the constitution. Every accused person has a right of appeal finish and klaar
Bekumnandi kule court because we already discussed that and it's binding
Where there are two conflicting provisions in the constitution, both provisions must be given full effect.
that provision is self defeating and begs for further interrogation. If one provision says to forfeit a right to appeal and one confirms the right appeal, they cant both be given full effect on the very basis of contradiction
Bravo adv Ngcukatoibi, student of law, no howling n threaning judges but sterm firm in principle of law, period, so ppl must not be irritable with facts of the law
Think again
Hcçcvcchcchçcvjviç chocoholics čhhçcvvhçcčuihfgfhioccihugigufgcccghhggu chic hc hi gghfuuiciihfhu C Bhv ouchhhhuhhhiohhuchhhuugcugc u hhuicchuhfh ihvcchucoufhfhihufuhhgghfugfhifhfuufiffghhhfhfhfh high chin ouuhuuccohvcchuhuhuochhucvhhuhuhhcuhcohchuhuhgufgfhvughfifhhf good yhuychh I bounce hugs ihufucuiuhhchucihhhgcgcuigicicg ugogo h h hug cucuucughghufufuhgguggfhuhhf h h hchuhuggfihgfug C C hhhufhfiviggvh iughfhuhhugiuuugghugghfuhuuhufofuhfuufuhuhhuhugiuh Uff fhgvughhhufhhghhhfhucg G hhhhuffufuhogh h ihvhfivhguufiffhuhfugfgfiufihgifg UFS uhoghigicug UFSuhhhfuuhugghuhuhhgfcuhi Higgs hi ouu hi chi vcuguufuhgohoufuvvcihichuh g h chçu c g cuicJayhawks G h icing ugh icuchugigicuhgihuhc gibi CBC C h chi
This man is so intelligent ✊🏾✊🏾
Brilliant advocate
He is intelligent, but who is " irritable with facts of the law" ?
Advocate T is in violation of his legal position.... It is a conflict of interest for him to be arguing this case!!!!
Adv. Ngcuka mastered English 🎉
Senza Kwenzeke 😂😂
Too much
Very true
You guys are so obsessed with English as if it puts food on your table. In this case how does mastering his English benefit him,cos am sure that even the most uneducated person in that room can speak a bad English but make a valid point of communication.
Africans are doing well
Was Justice Theron trying to get the Adv. to ignore the ruling the Con-court had made re Zuma as though it doesnʼt hold any significance?? Strange indeed and excellent work by Adv. Ngcukaitobi
If I was Ngcukaitobi I was going to be irritated by Judge Theron trying to re argue the same case where she and judge Madlanga had a minority judgement. Zuma was asked to do submissions to the Constitutional Court and he refused.
Ey kufundiwe la.
Black excellence. On both sides. ❤️
I feel so big... 😎😎😎
Not black excellence, just excellence unless you see people based on race as a start
@@markstemmett5296 you nailed it. Right at the bull's eye!
Mr zuma was treated unfair 😢
Does he not understand what is going on?
I already see minority judgement through Justice Theron
The majority are not always necessarily correct, though their decision becomes the binding.
The court will find that section 47 exclude Zuma sentence which was imposed without the option of appeal😮
Thembeka is legendary, the judge is caught up in her beef from the last sitting.
Correct ,the Constitution trumps all other laws .
It i a big shame for some people to be the graduates of the law but not able to submit constructive points in Court
GOD and ancestors will assist on what they do to Him JGZ
Justice Theron, God is with u and may u be blessed beyond, I see God in you
Justice Theron should be the Deputy Chief Justice
Historical interpretation is equally important in deciding a case,Sir .See Salmond on interpretation .
Food for thought
Tension in the Court room
Adv evades answer on alternative authority supporting his contention
Tembeka will loose this appeal, which is good for us as MK.You can not be forcing judges to make a decision that suit you.
Adv Thembeka Ngcukaitobi remains one of the best legal minds in the RSA. May you please continue to make us proud...👏👏👏
She's has no case, it does not make sense what she says...! What type of judge is that? 🤔
Apply the law equally to everyone it does not matter if is the majority judgement .
How come the majority judgement is not tested to see if its within the law...this majority rule is not good when not tested against the law,even in the parliament its being misused we have seen this many times.
Judge Theron please replace Ratha van Witness in the Senzo Meyiwa trail
Why?
Good debate by both jurists but the decision of the Constitutional Court is binding. Unfortunately the Constitutional court was not supposed to entertain Justice Zondo's application for contempt as a court of first instance . They were supposed to approach the high court so as to give effect to the appeal procedure.
I also have the same view and that commissions should be preside by Judges of High Court or SÇA so that the person can have opportunity to appeal.
Sooo interesting, this captures a really historic debate in our constiutional democracy!
What rubbish. Both good respectable submissions.
Justice Theron and Jaftha not captured
It is interesting that the court's imposition or this contempt of court only applies to Mr Zuma not Mr Koos Bekker when he refused to come to the commission. Sebasabani abelungu? Or they gave the judges something as well that they impose the same sanctions that are imposed on us blacks if that's the case then this law thing is unconstitutional
Even the late apartheid president P Botha he raised in public that he won't attend stupid commission.
Koos Bekker was not summoned by the State capture Commission if he had then you will have a valid argument, Botha was found guilty by Magistrate Court & won on appeal at the High Court on on technical grounds.
@@khaltsharivist365 Someone who clearly reads and doesn't listen to gossip ...
I wonder where they get such brains
Ha!!!, ziyadhuba
Zuma laws are coming back to bite them 🎉🎉🎉. Ngcukaitobi is emotional 😅
The problem with this guy is that he hates Zuma
You guys and this nonsense of always assuming that Zuma is being hated by people who dissent to him is tiring.
You know nothing about the law that’s why
So Mpofu also hate IEC
He is hired to do a job and you will be shocked one day when Zuma hires him. He will give his all to represent his client then.
Only unlearned fools will think like that, if you are representing your client you work on instruction. It's a battle of brains.
Judge Theron grills...🙆🏾♂️💯
Reyno de Beer's video on his Liberty Fighters channel provides valuable background and insight into this important case.
Ngcukaitobi for president...❤💪
It seems like Ngcukaitobi and Mpofu are the top 2 lawyers in South Africa............... And they have been debating every case in the courts
They are the most politically connected.
The 2 we can not match Ngcukaithobi is top notch
Zondo was quick to sentence Zuma but he didn't give him a chance to appeal,.,..why didn't they sentence those who refused to go give evidence in the T.R.C what has changed are there Zuma laws in this country.now i believe that Zuma is dieing for all blacks in this country trying to protect it against the puppet controlling the state.... God is on hour side rise Africa rise it's now or never.we love you baba uzama
To seperate cases, one was voluntary but zuma was being investigated as part of the corruption & fraud in which he was involved
The constitution provides the denial of appeal!
Yet there is a right to direct access - in other words mr zuma could access the concourt directly!
Zuma is appealing which has been denied.
Which God is on your side? Maybe you should read the bible if you truely believe in the Lord God Almighty, it is repeatedly said God abhors sin which includes lies, deceit, corruption, etc. Why do u think God repeatedly turned away from israel since coming out of egypt, because of sin, idol worship and serving other gods, pagan gods
Zondo did not sentence Zuma
@@petrusesterhuyzen2087 What da fuck! 'involved'?
God is not part of this circus, maybe y ou mean gods not God the creator of heaven and earth. He hate sin (fornicators, thieves, rapists, etc)
Can an apex court be a court of 1st instance?
This guy is arguing a losing battle
Judge Theron is not disputing a sentence was passed by the CC and that its binding. She is merely interrogating the fact given so the judgement was passed certain aspects of it was overlooked and will alway come back to bite the law and its interpreters.
Rights engraved in the constitution were overlooked/violated and this needs to be corrected 😂 there is no escaping it
My biggest worry is that Zuma is 1 foot in the grave and out of expediency the CC Judges forgot their judgements are binding on future judgements where Zuma wont be present. The Zuma conviction elevated the CC Judges above the Constitution and their hate, pride and myopia is not allowing them to right their wrongs to cure future constitutional crises.
@@caughtontape5829 wonderfully said!
Good Advocate!
I think it was heated between the two....
But when another judge and court has decided, and we refer to that judgement, we did our job and we are right, and we have a court judgement to back it up.
So what are we going to do about that judgement? Act as if it is not there? Don't we refer to judgements in the South African law?
If it was wrong, who is to blame? The advocate?
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
The Advocate is a BRILLIANT LEGAL MIND and this Judge is dodgy.
What is she doing
I felt like she disrespected the majority judgment in the Zuma case
She really did, to me seemingly is trying to correct the previous judgement made by the majority which she was not in agreement.
Ngcukayithobi does n't want to answer difficult questions .He becomes emotional and answer from the heart not from the brain .
Not law,Mam ,the Constitution
Gcukaithobi got it, she's merely giving clarity.
This debate is clear, the constitutional Court erred in Zumas judgement and if not rectified legislatively the highest court in the land is setting or has set a bad precedent.
Ngcukaitobi is arrogant and disrespectful even when he doesn't know the unswer, he would unswer what was not asked and arrogantly so.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤞
Ngcukaitobi really knows his story
Not on this one you cannot correct the wrong with wrong just because there is been a judgment..
Not in this case though. Facts aren't on his side. He will win this case because of Zondo, Ramaphosa and Ruperts
14:44 14:52 Concourt is our APEX court.To which forum in SA would the so called appeal would have been heard??
Then the Constitutional Court shouldn't have passed a sentence in this regard, but should have instead referred their contempt ruling to the High Court (which has sentencing powers)to decide on the sentence for the contempt of the Constitutional Court.
My great advocate is becoming arrogant 🙄
Stupid avocado 🥑
Is this a small claims court ??Vetri EC Komani .🙏🇿🇦🇿🇦🙏
Ngqukaitobi is highly emotional. Had to be actually told to tone down by dcj😮
I like how she folded her hands after that killer point on 6:55
Two great legal minds
I concur
Where does the concourt get the power of penal jurisdiction to impose an original sentence? That is the crux. It must not be so. Concourt may do nothing but interpret and refer back to lower court.
Ngcukaytobi is arrogant ,as he already knows the outcome . He was humbled on previous courts,where grounds were leveled and equal.
True
He seems to be personal with the good smart lady
After the judgement
Wenzenists: the courts are with ramaphosa 🗣🗣🗣
He knows concourt is controlled by imperialists allegedly 😂
It's not uncommon for individuals of African descent to resort to emotions and employ strawman arguments and fallacious attacks when their intellect falls short. This phenomenon persists regardless of the level of education attained by the individual. I find this observation rather intriguing and worthy of contemplation
She must be dying g to hit him with the constitution book to wake him up - did he pass his degree with 30% too?
Adv Thembeka is fighting a loosing battle but his hopes are pinned in J Theron making a small error in enterpreting the constitutional laws which is highly unlikely though.