As for Dr Hlophe matter, it's very sad and unfortunate to allow politics to ruin and tarnish someone like Dr Hlophe, such an assett to the motherland 😢
@@grungle-ix8om Surely, but the issue at hand is simply what needs to be laundered. One could equally say the commenter is deflecting for wrestling eff/vbs issue. I've answered "no" by the way.
There is a slant towards accepting black on white racism by the commentator thus questioning defence by some people feeling threatening by such tendencies. I have often noticed this hence my unsubscribing from this channel.
U don't even know what the state is. The judiciary which u refer as the justice is a subset of the 3 arms of state. The executive, legislature and the judiciary. It's constitutional for the legislature and executive to appoint judges.
Yes Judge Hlophe has the legal right to sit on the JSC and likely the moral right as well. His removal from the bench seems a political move by the defensive powerful in SA.
Indeed it was a political move. They tried for tears to get rid of him, and given their propensity to bribe, who knows how they finally achieved their objective?
There's no explicit legal provision which prevents John from sitting from the JSC, those that seek legal review must require a constitutional review on all urgent matters of the country not just John. As I also want to talk about the land issue (section 25)
Sizwe , I am at variance with your "double jeopardy" assertions . Firstly , a "leopard never changes it's spots" . If unethical pursuasion in corridors caused the impeachment in question , what's to say there won't be a reoccurrence . There is also a legal concept (ask your dad) about an habitual criminal . (recidivism sounds familiar) To cut a long story short , prevention is better than cure . (Ask anyone) Hlophe must be barred from selection of any future judge selection panel . He is already morally and ethically compromised. Enuf said .
What leopard spots does Hlophe have which you are afraid he might display again?🤔. Because you stole sugar from your mother's kitchen when you were young, we must not allow you to be an MP? Tell me when did you, Mr Leopard, drop those your thieving spots? Get over it man!
To be honest from a non legal point of view I believe that MP's should not be part of the JSC. It blurs the seperation of powers the Legasliture and the Judiciary.
Since we are suppose to be a democratic society, the judiciary should be appointed by elected representatives of the people. Where else would the judiciary derive their mandate from except by virtue of the society that they eventually would have to adjudicate grievances for.
@kobusscheltema3175 There shouldn't be an alternative for democracy and its unpredictable outcomes. I would say bring on more democratic processes in efforts to shift the SA societal mental & moral framework away from authoritarianism to enlightenment. Unfortunately, we haven't evolved with the 'on paper' democratic dispensation. The majority of the Black & White citizenry are still longing for dictates from political elites ruling over them. Judging by voting patterns, SA'ns feel most safe when the state does the thinking and the people the deference. We've weighted Democratic SA and found it wanting, unable to fill our yearnings for a 'Big Brother' government system. Euro-South Africans are nostalgic about a time when they could hardly petition their government, nor had any noticeable democratic rights except to vote. Indigenous groups retreat to the political ethnic enclaves. Seems everyone is fearing democratic agency because we fail to rise above our past, held back either by privilege or by destitution.
Dr. SMW, please do an in depth episode on the VBS Saga with specific reference which implicates some of the gumboot and red overall MP looting brigade! Thank you!
Unfortunately, Mpofu SMW is not those daily maverick clowns that push narratives and agendas in social media. You will age till you turn grey and subsequently perish like apartheid while waiting for propaganda to be present as evidence in a court of law. Typical beneficiary of land thieves and barbaric racists government trying to be relevant.😂
@@sindiletobayo3350 #@ No No, you are so wrong, There is absolutely no hatred what so ever. Citizens just want to be informed by Dr. SMW so that we simply can get closer to the TRUTH! As South African Citizens we highly Trust Dr. SMW's in depth and highly educated analysis at all times! Have a lovely weekend Sindile!
@@sindiletobayo3350 1.They wear red overalls and gumboots, 2. They brigade together in parliament 3. Theres VBS looting allegations against them. In your opinion are those facts hate? Or are you just defensive as your ego is tied to the EFF?
The Hlophe issue is not complex at all. Committee work in parliament is just an extension of or can be read as part of an MP’s job description. If one is fit and proper to be elected and sit as an MP, it becomes irrational to then undemocratically pick and choose which aspects of an MP’s work they can or cannot undertake.
Sizwe, I applaud your unbiased critical analysis. which can't be faulted. To bar DR JOHN HLOPHE from the JSC is mere speculation of what he may or may not do which has no bases in law. Keep up the good work!!!!
So you're suggesting we just take the gamble because we don't know what he's going to do this time? Great analysis i fully agree. Lets gamble with our judiciary.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it “Quotation by Frederic Bastiat.
Hlopes gross misconduct is not something abstract. It was related to undue political influencing. How can he then sit on a panel where future judges are evaluated? He will choose candidates sympathetic to MK.
The argument against Hlophe is driven by the vindictiveness and self-righteousness of certain individuals. If we are to take that ethical approach, the majority of people in government would have to go.
Our now Minister of Correctional services served under De Klerk era Apartheid South Africa 😢...now He is A member of Parliament & Minister !!! Are we Gona continue having Amnesia 😂❤😢😂😅😅...
That's an insane comparison. He wasn't impeached based on his historical political preference. Apartheid is dead and most of us are happy about that. Let's build a bridge and get over it now.
@@mogirl94 here we go again. 30 years ago apartheid died and now we are here. We are allowed to have differing opinions and you can't use apartheid as an excuse for everything. It's insane. 🙄
You have an obsession with presenting these rogues in the most uncritical light. When will we hear reasonable reflections on the ethical and ideological poverty of these thugs.
He is not a criminal is he? So what is is this?? We vote for people to represent us and some people want to tell us they can't represent us. So our votes don't mean anything?
@@phumlanimncwango7686 no problem he can represent you that is not the issue. The issue is him serving on the JSC where he will sit in judgement of the suitability of candidates to serve as judges. That whilst he himself have been found not suitable to continue as a judge. If that is not an ethical no go then I don't know what is.
Thank you for your insight. It's a good thing to have young persons with a potential like you, Clement,and Mpho Dagada,are and many more. Please keep it up the good work,of and keep on SUNNING for God wants to use you, to expose the truth to South Africans❤
I want to swear, let me rather say the poor are infinitely punished buy the elites and those who are in possession of power delegated to them. It is a moral question. No he can go do that in the private sector, but please this is a public position. No, no, no to corruption. There is a differencè between elected and appointed.
Can he legally yes. Should he definitely no. The Constitution is one thing but then there is also ethics. Our national and public space is devoid of ethical leadership and management and this is what is underlying the country going backwards at a rate of knots looking at established key indicators. Putting him up as a candidate exposed the lack of ethical leadership in MK. Just imagine him sitting in the first JSC sitting to appoint people as judges and the candidate objecting to his presence? I would if I'm a candidate. How can my suitability as a judge be presided over by somebody who has been removed as a judge through impeachment? It goes against any notion of ethics pure and simple. So no he should not. Sure serve in Parliament. JSC to look at demographic representivity as their primary consideration. Hell no they are primarily there to appoint the best person to the bench.
Didn't he take an oath when he bacame a judge? And he gave that the middle finger. So, has the leopard changed his spots? I think not. The whole thing here is actually not an issue of law but a issue of morality, Integrity and ethics. and I believe that he is sorely lacking in each of these areas.
Hlope has not been rehabiitated, his oath means nothing as a MP. If Hlope should be forgiven, as Gayton, as Cyril for Phala Phala, Julius and Floyd for VBS for their allegations and implications, including those serving as MP`s with allegations of corruption, then the same should appply others as well, including Renaldo. This is the problem with so called leadership in parliament, we have people referred to as Hounourable running our country with tainted and questionable history. The standard should be set, if you are under a dark cloud, where there is smoke there is fire, and those should be excluded, no matter who, be it Renaldo, Hlope etc. This is not qualities of leadership, that is how corruption starts, how its enabled, and how we as a country spiral into hopelessness. Our standards are very low, our values are low and the work ethic of parliament as a whole is low. There is no integrity. There are many with untainted history, we have many good people ,why do we settle for second best.
Renaldo’s sin is of a class of its own. The two just do not equate. He has hatred against 95% of the country. Hlophe has no video of him wanting to eliminate 5% or 95% of the citizens of this country. By the way, racism lies behind white people’s wish to see Hlophe destroyed. We’re used to your gaslighting and destruction of competent, fearless black males, and we’re no longer playing that game.
CRIMINALS SIT IN PARLIAMENT TODAY, NOT JUST DR HLOPHE. PHALAPHALA MARIKANA, THOSE WHO VOTED TO RETAIN APARTHEID, RACISTS, THOSE WHO WERE CITED IN STATE CAPTURE YET TO APPEAR BEFORE COMMISSION ARE ALL ANGELS?
Gayton Mckenzie was a prisoner and convicted, but now as an MP, he has a right to serve as the Minister of Justice if given that duty by the President. Hlophe on my view has his full right to serve in the JSC and we really need his contribution taking into account his experience in Judiciary.
Thank you Sir/Dr.for your detailed,objective,appreciative and educational analysis of the subject factor at hand.That you not only give your opinion; but base your analysis on reading what the constitution and legislation governing the "said" topic prescribe; makes a layman like myself gain some understanding on how these institutions function ,so as to avoid making comments on something you haven't got a depth knowledge of.
Thanks Sizwe, your analysis is absolutely spot on, but I can tell you that courts in South Africa have been very predictable when dealing either Zuma or anyone linked to him.
Excellent analysis as usual Dr. S. The issue of ethics and rationality must stay out of the prescripts of legal determinations. The simple reason is that SA is not a homogeneous society where we all have an inclination of same ethics and rationality. An example in the suburbs is an old adage of black people struggling to exercise their cultural practices to slaughter, or in certain instances marry more than one wife, etc. On who's determination must it be considered that these practices are ethical or rational - or once again the black people's stances must take secondary consideration? I say the written rule must apply, and if need be the written rule must be agreed upon by all and amended accordingly as society sees fit... thank you.
Agree 100%. There must be written rules about the kind of leadership we want or people who qualify to be MPs. Otherwise,we will find ourselves in situations where we have to be comfortable with questionable characters. Imagine one day Wouter Basson being a MP & sitting on a portfolio committee health with his history
Hello there His appeal to the CC has not been finalised,is this justice? The body that found him guilty of the allegged gross misconduct was improperly constituted so invalid. If then,continued through this perspective,how different is this approach from "mob justice?'
Who gets to decide if something is unethical ? I think we should follow the constitutional provision on this matter and leave the matters of ethics to political cat fights. Let's allow John Hlophe to sit on the JSC
Singaphela yilaba. Since 1994 they have been working hard to neu-tralise competent black males who are not afraid to offend their sensitivities. They need to become strong and stop fear-ing black m-en.
I think it must also make provision for a president who has broken his oath of office not to be a president and a judge that protects the president from accountability to be fired and arrested.
I really love your analisis. Really unbiased and fair. I do miss the uploads though. I can only assume there's no big news in the world of politics currently happening. 😊
He's there as an MP not as a judge.He deserves all benefits dts comes with dt privilege according 2 d law.Ethics comes with a subjective individual opinions dt may lead 2 endless debates bcz there z no law or parliamentary guid lines dt may lead 2 constructive conclusion.This may lead 2 questions lyk,what z ethical abt DA 2 sign an agreement dt agrees not 2 rase a Phalaphala issue.What z ethical about being led by some1 who admitted d Phalaphala accusations?
The comment by Adv.Xulu is that the JSC's composition that found dr Hlophe was improper and has been declared as such,which means that he has not been found guilty by a properly constituted body i.e. JSC His appeal has not been determined by the CC,is this not defeating the means of justice Besides,the ethical dimensions mentioned should ideally find expression in the 8 Batho Pele principles The rationalle is as follows: This is service delivery issue through which the citizens participate in shaping how and what service to expect Secondly,it is transformation issue for service delivery,i.e. From Rule based service delivery which is Top down to Batho Pele approach where citizen inform the process on what,when,how and at what cost a particular service is to be renderd The most important principle being, Under the principle of Redress,a mechanism is built in on ways to address complaints as the avenue of first instance.This approach prevent stakeholders from rushing to the courts without exhausting internal dispute resolution machanism agreed upon
I personally don't care what's applicable in law. The man committed a political misconduct and people want to pat him on the back and say, "Well done, here's your reward.". Shame, he got dismissed for misconduct. He should have been criminally charged!
Thanks for touching on the example of mckanzie in that the fact that he has served his time does not delete the fact of why he was convicted. Therefore equally he should be deemed to be unethical to be in parliament if we have to use the colonial thinking. In the case of Zuma he is barred from parliament because of the length of the imposed sentence. Therefore why should hlope be barred from ht e JSC panel when he already qualified to be a parliamentarian and where there is no provision in the constitution regarding the implications of the sentencing impeachment of hlope?
Separating Ethics from the Law is a strangely South African concept, one the ANC fought against for decades. Hlophe was not elected to Parliament, he was selected by his Party to be an MP. Now we have an impeached Judge on the Judicial Committee that decides on the ethical and legal aspects of a Judge's performance ( the same Committee that removed him from the Office of Judge) and a convicted Bank Robber, in Parliament. We could laugh about it if it wasn't so sad.
To be honest, he was voted out of power by Parliament and Ronaldo Gouws was canceled by cancel culture for delete videos thats decade old. Yet one is in parliament and the other is not.
Thank you for a balanced presentation. I disagree with 2 points: 1. I find Comparisons between Gayton McKenzie and Hlope disingenuous: GB acknowledges his past wrong doings - as far as I know, Hlope still denies wrong doing and plays the victim...2) I found your dismissal of the ethical, and prioritisation of the legal argument concerning...because ethically compromised MPs were elected in tbe past, we should abandon ethical standards? Haibo.
@phumelelomthimude8082 because if a president steps out of line you can still take them to court lol. A president is replaceable. Once justice itself is compromised, there is only chaos
If I were Dr Hlophe, I would not want to be on the JSC. Why accept the nomination? He is an intelligent man. He knows what he's doing. He should turn over a new leaf and stop being controversial. It detracts from his talent as a jurist and politician, both areas in which he will excel without the bad press which follows him.
One has to question his intelligence when he supports a myriad of economically destructive policies. Nothing he stands for will lead to prosperity or upliftment. He is a compromised individual with malicious intent.
Of course. Sadly a man who would choose to undermine and corrupt the system. He was a LEADER of a body that represents INTEGRITY. Please SA needs TRUTH. and HONESTY!
I am of the view that while we may rightfully be questioning the issue of Dr. Hlophe, whom I still refer to as JP, the bias in this argument is glaring. Gayton McKenzie is a minister despite his criminal record. He sits in Parliament, which is expected to pass the very same laws he had broken, and he will be part of those voting for or against those laws. In the case of JP Hlophe, the law is silent, which is, to some extent, equivalent to the law that allows McKenzie to be eligible to be part of Parliament and serve as a minister. The entry point to the position JP Hlophe occupies is being a member of Parliament in good standing, being nominated by Parliament members, and if he met that criterion, I think it is pointless to argue. On the other hand, he is not expected to make any sole decisions or appointments as a result of his nomination to the role he occupies.
Eish Ethical is none existing in politics....but in general the word ethical is overrated....we can discuss that until cows come home and back to the veld...that's same as having a law degree I'm sorry to be blunt....so conscious should be the measure or what guides an individual...as you have put it Sizwe if we go by word ethics no one would be in that parliament. Also as we're people we have a differing measure of ethics...so it's a very subjective word. Ayeye thanks as always....❤
Very well argued! I changed my mind on this and it is now firstly an issue of defending free speech for me. I do not think MPs should be disbarred for convictions and impeachment. Having said that, Hlophe is clearly a compromised person defending his corrupt boss. I'm surprised you can say, with a straight face, that he has sworn to defend the constitution when that clearly means nothing to him. His party aims to dismantle it. My other criticism is that after waxing lyrical about the importance and power of an MP, who is one vote among hundreds, you downplay the much amplified voice of corrupt Hlophe on the JSC.
The judges are avoiding Dr Hlophe fot not doing justice to him.After listening to Adv. Xulu i'm convinced that something is wrong with them?May be they are jelous and why now the person who was supposed to apologise to Dr Hlophe has not done so until now instead is leading the people who is advocating the removal of Dr Hlophe.Why must Dr Hlophe suffer indefinetly.I think that is cruelty on the part of those who hate him.
Please check up on positions in uberrima fides - he was found to have broken the public trust as bearer of the highest form of it - he belongs neither in parliament nor on the JSE.
Sizwe help me on this one how do judges do deliberation. Why am sking is he tried to persuade other judges to make findings that are positive to JZ by so doing then he is unfit . Some plp who have been in jail we rehabilitate we give them second chance. Why do we not think that he has been rehabilitated and he will use his experience to do right thing now.
@MentalFacility-u7o 🤣 sounds about right. If she goes "na na na na" I know what to do. The problem is not all videos start with the full song so I had to remember which one does.
Yet again you make a compelling and convincing argument which I reluctantly have to agree with. I do believe that the will of the people should be the ultimate authority on all matters of state. So if 15% of the nation has decided that they want MK to be in power, then so it should be. I do however believe that positions in parliament and the cabinet should be made known before people vote. In this case I don't think it would make a difference unfortunately, But I would love it in future if parties are obligated before the elections to say "this is who would be our representative for minister of finance, speaker of the house etc to be" so that 1. These types of questions do not come up after the fact and 2. People know who they are essentially appointing to the various roles. My other critique of this situation is one that I think needs future considerations:- At what point do we as a society hold people accountable ethically? It may not be illegal or unconstitutional for Hlophe to hold this office, but as you pointed out, this is an individual who was impeached. I think that is something very important to take into account. We need ethics to play as important a role as legality. Qualifications aside, moral and character are important.
From my opinion. The parliamentary strategy behind MKp is a continuation of the wounded animal approach. Thus they would from my opinion continue to seek methods to activate the wounded animal narrative, for the foreseeable future.
I just don't think its rational for members of the executive to be exempted from the "fit and proper" standard. I've never understood how offices with such a high duty of care in the executive aren't treated with the same standard as the judiciary and other professions in South Africa. To professionalise the public service ultimately means to be held to a higher standard as a consequence of the higher duty of care. Legal practitioners, Magistrates and Judges are regularly held to this higher standard of fit and proper, with unique sanctions such as suspension or removal from the roll. We constantly bemoan the fact that MP's implicated in malfeasance never seem to face consequences. I personally don't have any beef with Judge Hlope. I think we should just be consistent with the principals of what it means to be fit and proper in the context of members of the executive.
I hate to single out Judge Hlope with this argument. But, "What's good for the goose..." I think this standard should be applied to all members, President Ramaphosa included
The list system is relevant here, Hlope was not on the list at the time of the election. He was not really elected. He was added after the election. All parties do that, it's essentially anti democratic in that we the people do not select our representative, some party officials do.
Whether his impact in parliament is small or great it is still a problem that he would be allowed to secure that R1 million rand salary from taxpayers, and the government seems to consistently have people in powerful positions in government who do not deserve that role. Even if it is legally allowed it is an ethical problem. What do you think?
Sizwe thanks for your learned analysis, however, being black alone carries its own stigma should there be any shadow of doubt on your character is an immenant vindication.
Yes he should be allowed to sit on the JSC, he is extremely competent but the NGO Freedom under Law and DA Adv Glynnis Breytenbach have an axe too grind with him. Dr .Hlophe will recuse himself from JSC interviews if there is a conflict of interest when faced with Judges who appear before the JSC that are involved in litigation that he conducts. Its hypocritical that President Ramaphosa needed impeachment in parliament for money laundering and impropriety in the Phala Phala case but their was no such outrage . This is a case of selective morality.
The Judiciary should serve as an independent body
As for Dr Hlophe matter, it's very sad and unfortunate to allow politics to ruin and tarnish someone like Dr Hlophe, such an assett to the motherland 😢
Do you know or have you at least heard as to why Dr Hlophe is no longer judge?
@@makgaboepitanus6969 YES.
I follow your sessions and enjoy the analysis thereof. I cant wait to hear your analysis of the VBS and EFF
The question is whether dr Hlophe should sit in the judicial service commission or not? Not anything about vbs/eff yet. My answer is no.
@@makgaboepitanus6969 A commenter can ask any question. Why are you deflecting
I like the podcast but it seems to me that it is pro - EFF and MKP so i doubt we will hear anything anytime soon here regarding VBS heist yet.
@@grungle-ix8om Surely, but the issue at hand is simply what needs to be laundered. One could equally say the commenter is deflecting for wrestling eff/vbs issue. I've answered "no" by the way.
There is a slant towards accepting black on white racism by the commentator thus questioning defence by some people feeling threatening by such tendencies. I have often noticed this hence my unsubscribing from this channel.
How many law breakers who are now lawmakers in parliament?
@@sphumelelengcamu1984 yes, all should be kicked out. No more bloated Parliament
Sizwe indeed thank you no one has said it better then you big ups!!!!!
Bottom line: MP's should not be involved in choosing anyone for Judiciary positions. There should be a clear separation between state and justice.
then you do not understand the concept of 'democracy'
Who should then choose judges?
Interesting concept. I would rather argue The nominations of the mosts voters gets the position, or 2/3 Marjory.
U don't even know what the state is. The judiciary which u refer as the justice is a subset of the 3 arms of state. The executive, legislature and the judiciary. It's constitutional for the legislature and executive to appoint judges.
Superb! thanks for the analysis.
All the best Dr Hlophe sethembe wena baba
where was he during the Guptas when they were controlling Zuma
At his home same as you
Yes Judge Hlophe has the legal right to sit on the JSC and likely the moral right as well. His removal from the bench seems a political move by the defensive powerful in SA.
And RAPISTS CAN TEACH SCHOLARS
Indeed it was a political move. They tried for tears to get rid of him, and given their propensity to bribe, who knows how they finally achieved their objective?
No, anyone linked to that crook Zuma may not serve in any public office, finish and klaar!
😂😂😂😂😂 kuhlekwa noma kufiwe@@dannym7593
There's no explicit legal provision which prevents John from sitting from the JSC, those that seek legal review must require a constitutional review on all urgent matters of the country not just John.
As I also want to talk about the land issue (section 25)
Count me in. We need to talk about the pressing constitutional matters to be reviewed😮
Sizwe , I am at variance with your "double jeopardy" assertions .
Firstly , a "leopard never changes it's spots" .
If unethical pursuasion in corridors caused the impeachment in question , what's to say there won't be a reoccurrence .
There is also a legal concept (ask your dad) about an habitual criminal . (recidivism sounds familiar)
To cut a long story short , prevention is better than cure . (Ask anyone)
Hlophe must be barred from selection of any future judge selection panel .
He is already morally and ethically compromised.
Enuf said .
What leopard spots does Hlophe have which you are afraid he might display again?🤔. Because you stole sugar from your mother's kitchen when you were young, we must not allow you to be an MP? Tell me when did you, Mr Leopard, drop those your thieving spots? Get over it man!
You're crazy and what about Groenewald and his behavior and other MP members. Zizi,and those who were implication in state capture.
To be honest from a non legal point of view I believe that MP's should not be part of the JSC. It blurs the seperation of powers the Legasliture and the Judiciary.
Since we are suppose to be a democratic society, the judiciary should be appointed by elected representatives of the people. Where else would the judiciary derive their mandate from except by virtue of the society that they eventually would have to adjudicate grievances for.
From what I understand that was the case historically. I agree with you 💯
What is the alternative?
@kobusscheltema3175 There shouldn't be an alternative for democracy and its unpredictable outcomes. I would say bring on more democratic processes in efforts to shift the SA societal mental & moral framework away from authoritarianism to enlightenment.
Unfortunately, we haven't evolved with the 'on paper' democratic dispensation. The majority of the Black & White citizenry are still longing for dictates from political elites ruling over them. Judging by voting patterns, SA'ns feel most safe when the state does the thinking and the people the deference.
We've weighted Democratic SA and found it wanting, unable to fill our yearnings for a 'Big Brother' government system.
Euro-South Africans are nostalgic about a time when they could hardly petition their government, nor had any noticeable democratic rights except to vote. Indigenous groups retreat to the political ethnic enclaves. Seems everyone is fearing democratic agency because we fail to rise above our past, held back either by privilege or by destitution.
@@kobusscheltema3175 JSC operates above government. I may be wrong but I understand that this was the case historically
Dr. SMW, please do an in depth episode on the VBS Saga with specific reference which implicates some of the gumboot and red overall MP looting brigade! Thank you!
Unfortunately, Mpofu SMW is not those daily maverick clowns that push narratives and agendas in social media. You will age till you turn grey and subsequently perish like apartheid while waiting for propaganda to be present as evidence in a court of law. Typical beneficiary of land thieves and barbaric racists government trying to be relevant.😂
The level of hatred in this comment is from out of this world, actually it's from HELL
@@sindiletobayo3350 #@ No No, you are so wrong, There is absolutely no hatred what so ever. Citizens just want to be informed by Dr. SMW so that we simply can get closer to the TRUTH! As South African Citizens we highly Trust Dr. SMW's in depth and highly educated analysis at all times! Have a lovely weekend Sindile!
@@sindiletobayo3350 1.They wear red overalls and gumboots,
2. They brigade together in parliament
3. Theres VBS looting allegations against them.
In your opinion are those facts hate?
Or are you just defensive as your ego is tied to the EFF?
thanks for bringing back that sound Sizwe
The Hlophe issue is not complex at all. Committee work in parliament is just an extension of or can be read as part of an MP’s job description. If one is fit and proper to be elected and sit as an MP, it becomes irrational to then undemocratically pick and choose which aspects of an MP’s work they can or cannot undertake.
But Hlophe is not fit nor proper to seat as an MP.
Sizwe, I applaud your unbiased critical analysis. which can't be faulted. To bar DR JOHN HLOPHE from the JSC is mere speculation of what he may or may not do which has no bases in law. Keep up the good work!!!!
So you're suggesting we just take the gamble because we don't know what he's going to do this time? Great analysis i fully agree. Lets gamble with our judiciary.
Thank you very much for clearing that up Dr Sizwe. Now it's time for parliament to make the right decision and approve him. 🙏🏽
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it “Quotation by Frederic Bastiat.
Perfectly describes the Apartheid system and its then & current beneficiaries.
Absolutely Jenny. 30 years later and the children are still going on about apartheid.
@@ChildofGod-g8fbrainwashed
Love your channel. Please stay impartial. Keep up the good work.
Im waiting for the BVS episode that will be a big test of Dr’s impartiality.
Wow! I love watching this boy as much as I love watching his father! Like father like Son!
HE'S NOT BOY, thats how the men of your Forefathers were called by your white colonizers! He's a man
Hlopes gross misconduct is not something abstract. It was related to undue political influencing. How can he then sit on a panel where future judges are evaluated? He will choose candidates sympathetic to MK.
How will he know that those judges are sympathetic to MK
The argument against Hlophe is driven by the vindictiveness and self-righteousness of certain individuals. If we are to take that ethical approach, the majority of people in government would have to go.
@@alexmdluli561 😂 I can't believe you're asking this.
@@yvonnememela918 then those people should also be removed.
How can yt people lead black people whom they hate so much?
Our now Minister of Correctional services served under De Klerk era Apartheid South Africa 😢...now He is A member of Parliament & Minister !!! Are we Gona continue having Amnesia 😂❤😢😂😅😅...
That's an insane comparison. He wasn't impeached based on his historical political preference. Apartheid is dead and most of us are happy about that. Let's build a bridge and get over it now.
@@joumaseworld Historic political affiliation is not a crime. 😂😂 You're actually so funny.
They won’t touch the yt man. Some black people siding with the character assassination of Hlophe are quiet on the Apartheid minister
@@mogirl94 here we go again. 30 years ago apartheid died and now we are here. We are allowed to have differing opinions and you can't use apartheid as an excuse for everything. It's insane. 🙄
@@ChildofGod-g8f 30yrs vs 500 yrs. but Arithmetic is not your strong suit
You have an obsession with presenting these rogues in the most uncritical light. When will we hear reasonable reflections on the ethical and ideological poverty of these thugs.
@@BeXEllenttoeachother agree 100%. Defending the indefensable
Because he is promoting them.
He supports EFF and MK
He is not a criminal is he? So what is is this?? We vote for people to represent us and some people want to tell us they can't represent us. So our votes don't mean anything?
@@phumlanimncwango7686 no problem he can represent you that is not the issue. The issue is him serving on the JSC where he will sit in judgement of the suitability of candidates to serve as judges. That whilst he himself have been found not suitable to continue as a judge. If that is not an ethical no go then I don't know what is.
Thank you for your insight. It's a good thing to have young persons with a potential like you, Clement,and Mpho Dagada,are and many more. Please keep it up the good work,of and keep on SUNNING for God wants to use you, to expose the truth to South Africans❤
I want to swear, let me rather say the poor are infinitely punished buy the elites and those who are in possession of power delegated to them. It is a moral question. No he can go do that in the private sector, but please this is a public position. No, no, no to corruption. There is a differencè between elected and appointed.
💯
Legally he can. Morally he can't.
In terms of the Constitution he cannot. 😂😂😂
And in the legal sphere , legality enjoys prevaila than morality . With that being said , he is eligible to serve in the committee .
SA doesn't have morals.
The 3 most corrupt parties have a combined 64% of the vote.
That's scary.
Please quote that specific section in the constitution @@MzamoAdoons372
Morrally, then Ramaphosa , Zizi and others should also be in parliament.
Dr Sizwe you are really the best in what you are doing , keep up the good work brother !
So schools can hire rapists as teachers same concept
Talk about VBS episode sizwe
lol I want to see if he will cos Baba Mphou is involved with EFF
He doesn’t report to you though
Patiently waiting for Sizwe’s view on Dali Mpofu’s recent interview on Newzroom Africa about the VBS scandal
Can he legally yes. Should he definitely no. The Constitution is one thing but then there is also ethics. Our national and public space is devoid of ethical leadership and management and this is what is underlying the country going backwards at a rate of knots looking at established key indicators. Putting him up as a candidate exposed the lack of ethical leadership in MK. Just imagine him sitting in the first JSC sitting to appoint people as judges and the candidate objecting to his presence? I would if I'm a candidate. How can my suitability as a judge be presided over by somebody who has been removed as a judge through impeachment? It goes against any notion of ethics pure and simple. So no he should not. Sure serve in Parliament. JSC to look at demographic representivity as their primary consideration. Hell no they are primarily there to appoint the best person to the bench.
Didn't he take an oath when he bacame a judge? And he gave that the middle finger. So, has the leopard changed his spots? I think not. The whole thing here is actually not an issue of law but a issue of morality, Integrity and ethics. and I believe that he is sorely lacking in each of these areas.
Very Good! I appreciate the way you tackle an issue objectively.
Hlope has not been rehabiitated, his oath means nothing as a MP. If Hlope should be forgiven, as Gayton, as Cyril for Phala Phala, Julius and Floyd for VBS for their allegations and implications, including those serving as MP`s with allegations of corruption, then the same should appply others as well, including Renaldo. This is the problem with so called leadership in parliament, we have people referred to as Hounourable running our country with tainted and questionable history. The standard should be set, if you are under a dark cloud, where there is smoke there is fire, and those should be excluded, no matter who, be it Renaldo, Hlope etc. This is not qualities of leadership, that is how corruption starts, how its enabled, and how we as a country spiral into hopelessness. Our standards are very low, our values are low and the work ethic of parliament as a whole is low. There is no integrity. There are many with untainted history, we have many good people ,why do we settle for second best.
Our standards are a laugh commit crime get expelled for Misconduct but we have a job for you 😂
Colin i agree, not 2nd best but lowest choice.
Renaldo’s sin is of a class of its own.
The two just do not equate.
He has hatred against 95% of the country. Hlophe has no video of him wanting to eliminate 5% or 95% of the citizens of this country.
By the way, racism lies behind white people’s wish to see Hlophe destroyed. We’re used to your gaslighting and destruction of competent, fearless black males, and we’re no longer playing that game.
@@johankruger605and Glynis is what?
Glenis was suspended by N P A for deleting information that was very important to persecute someone. She did that purposefully.
Wake up south Afrikaans this goes far deeper think. And pray.
Could many criminals walk free from crimes committed
Scary
Like Breitebach
@@cheronbronkhorst659 and political fraudsters. As long as they support Zuma, not to worry, he'll find a way.
@@winniemabuza4451 found not guilty!
CRIMINALS SIT IN PARLIAMENT TODAY, NOT JUST DR HLOPHE. PHALAPHALA MARIKANA, THOSE WHO VOTED TO RETAIN APARTHEID, RACISTS, THOSE WHO WERE CITED IN STATE CAPTURE YET TO APPEAR BEFORE COMMISSION ARE ALL ANGELS?
@@VictorShongwe 😂😂 agreed on some of that but I'm sure our Constitution allows us freedom to vote for who we like 😜. Not criminal at all.
Gayton Mckenzie was a prisoner and convicted, but now as an MP, he has a right to serve as the Minister of Justice if given that duty by the President. Hlophe on my view has his full right to serve in the JSC and we really need his contribution taking into account his experience in Judiciary.
I have decided to abandon all sorts of learning, am going to take up this mountain of research and try emulate all about you. ❤❤❤
i'm watching from the Kingdom of Eswatini..........i love SMWX ITS THE BEST IN SA....
Sizwe u are a hero very open an straight talk and therefor the truth will comes out to what they want from Hlophe
Thank you Sir/Dr.for your detailed,objective,appreciative and educational analysis of the subject factor at hand.That you not only give your opinion; but base your analysis on reading what the constitution and legislation governing the "said" topic prescribe; makes a layman like myself gain some understanding on how these institutions function ,so as to avoid making comments on something you haven't got a depth knowledge of.
Thanks so much to simplify this for the public also for the. the empty headed people who are full of hatrad
Thanks Sizwe, your analysis is absolutely spot on, but I can tell you that courts in South Africa have been very predictable when dealing either Zuma or anyone linked to him.
Balanced and always informative. Keep it up.
You cannot defend the indefensible !!!!
Brilliant analysis!
Excellent analysis as usual Dr. S. The issue of ethics and rationality must stay out of the prescripts of legal determinations. The simple reason is that SA is not a homogeneous society where we all have an inclination of same ethics and rationality. An example in the suburbs is an old adage of black people struggling to exercise their cultural practices to slaughter, or in certain instances marry more than one wife, etc. On who's determination must it be considered that these practices are ethical or rational - or once again the black people's stances must take secondary consideration? I say the written rule must apply, and if need be the written rule must be agreed upon by all and amended accordingly as society sees fit... thank you.
@@archie4187 morals and ethics is common the world over and is colourblind and should not be confused with cultural traditions.
Agree 100%. There must be written rules about the kind of leadership we want or people who qualify to be MPs. Otherwise,we will find ourselves in situations where we have to be comfortable with questionable characters. Imagine one day Wouter Basson being a MP & sitting on a portfolio committee health with his history
Hello there
His appeal to the CC has not been finalised,is this justice?
The body that found him guilty of the allegged gross misconduct was improperly constituted so invalid.
If then,continued through this perspective,how different is this approach from "mob justice?'
The Constitution is supposed to serve the people, not the people serving the Constitution. Its incosistances and cracks are there for everyone to see
Who gets to decide if something is unethical ? I think we should follow the constitutional provision on this matter and leave the matters of ethics to political cat fights. Let's allow John Hlophe to sit on the JSC
Singaphela yilaba. Since 1994 they have been working hard to neu-tralise competent black males who are not afraid to offend their sensitivities.
They need to become strong and stop fear-ing black m-en.
@@baphithi true that
@@baphithiExactly.
Hi Sizwe, I think the constitution must make provision for MP's . IE ; if an MP was impeached then he or she can't return to parliament.
I think it must also make provision for a president who has broken his oath of office not to be a president and a judge that protects the president from accountability to be fired and arrested.
I really love your analisis. Really unbiased and fair. I do miss the uploads though. I can only assume there's no big news in the world of politics currently happening. 😊
He's there as an MP not as a judge.He deserves all benefits dts comes with dt privilege according 2 d law.Ethics comes with a subjective individual opinions dt may lead 2 endless debates bcz there z no law or parliamentary guid lines dt may lead 2 constructive conclusion.This may lead 2 questions lyk,what z ethical abt DA 2 sign an agreement dt agrees not 2 rase a Phalaphala issue.What z ethical about being led by some1 who admitted d Phalaphala accusations?
The comment by Adv.Xulu is that the JSC's composition that found dr Hlophe was improper and has been declared as such,which means that he has not been found guilty by a properly constituted body i.e. JSC
His appeal has not been determined by the CC,is this not defeating the means of justice
Besides,the ethical dimensions mentioned should ideally find expression in the 8 Batho Pele principles
The rationalle is as follows:
This is service delivery issue through which the citizens participate in shaping how and what service to expect
Secondly,it is transformation issue for service delivery,i.e.
From Rule based service delivery which is Top down to
Batho Pele approach where citizen inform the process on what,when,how and at what cost a particular service is to be renderd
The most important principle being,
Under the principle of Redress,a mechanism is built in on ways to address complaints as the avenue of first instance.This approach prevent stakeholders from rushing to the courts without exhausting internal dispute resolution machanism agreed upon
Sounds like a Zuma type strategy of delaying and abusing the system.
Enjoyed that analysis. Thank you
I personally don't care what's applicable in law. The man committed a political misconduct and people want to pat him on the back and say, "Well done, here's your reward.". Shame, he got dismissed for misconduct. He should have been criminally charged!
What he did? Can you repeat his words? If you can please repeat those words my dear and tell me his charges
Thanks for touching on the example of mckanzie in that the fact that he has served his time does not delete the fact of why he was convicted. Therefore equally he should be deemed to be unethical to be in parliament if we have to use the colonial thinking. In the case of Zuma he is barred from parliament because of the length of the imposed sentence. Therefore why should hlope be barred from ht e JSC panel when he already qualified to be a parliamentarian and where there is no provision in the constitution regarding the implications of the sentencing impeachment of hlope?
YES I AGREE WITH YOU Sizwe, there is not law preventing him
Separating Ethics from the Law is a strangely South African concept, one the ANC fought against for decades. Hlophe was not elected to Parliament, he was selected by his Party to be an MP. Now we have an impeached Judge on the Judicial Committee that decides on the ethical and legal aspects of a Judge's performance ( the same Committee that removed him from the Office of Judge) and a convicted Bank Robber, in Parliament. We could laugh about it if it wasn't so sad.
You also have an ethically challenged Glynis in the same committee.
So true.
We also have apartheid beneficiaries as ministers of agriculture. How sad
@@mogirl94 and there you go again cry baby.
@@mogirl94 just imagine!!
How on earth are black farmers expected to prosper under a party that has a long track record or neglecting black people?
To be honest, he was voted out of power by Parliament and Ronaldo Gouws was canceled by cancel culture for delete videos thats decade old. Yet one is in parliament and the other is not.
Thank you for a balanced presentation. I disagree with 2 points: 1. I find Comparisons between Gayton McKenzie and Hlope disingenuous: GB acknowledges his past wrong doings - as far as I know, Hlope still denies wrong doing and plays the victim...2) I found your dismissal of the ethical, and prioritisation of the legal argument concerning...because ethically compromised MPs were elected in tbe past, we should abandon ethical standards? Haibo.
You cannot compare a Judge to a President ! A Judge is held to the highest esteem !!
😂😂 So you would rather have a criminal run our country then a former judge sit on a JSC?
Yes but SA DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS AS THEY ARE THE 30% GENERATION PASS MARK
This host who died and made u Einstein
Which country are we talking about here?
You can’t be South African if you are saying this. 😮
@phumelelomthimude8082 because if a president steps out of line you can still take them to court lol. A president is replaceable. Once justice itself is compromised, there is only chaos
As Barak Obama once famously said.
""YES,HE CAN😊😊😊.""
If I were Dr Hlophe, I would not want to be on the JSC. Why accept the nomination? He is an intelligent man. He knows what he's doing. He should turn over a new leaf and stop being controversial. It detracts from his talent as a jurist and politician, both areas in which he will excel without the bad press which follows him.
One has to question his intelligence when he supports a myriad of economically destructive policies. Nothing he stands for will lead to prosperity or upliftment. He is a compromised individual with malicious intent.
I think this must give us clear reason to see that our constitution does not serve the purpose anymore it must be stated afresh
Priceless!
Very sound points made here👏👏!
Sizwe please do an episode on VBS
Coming soon.
Hands off Dr Hlophe
Of course. Sadly a man who would choose to undermine and corrupt the system. He was a LEADER of a body that represents INTEGRITY. Please SA needs TRUTH. and HONESTY!
Adv Glenn's of DA was forced to resign from the NPA for some serious allegations and no one is talking about it
Whiteness= Innocent in S.A . Its sickening to say the least
I am of the view that while we may rightfully be questioning the issue of Dr. Hlophe, whom I still refer to as JP, the bias in this argument is glaring. Gayton McKenzie is a minister despite his criminal record. He sits in Parliament, which is expected to pass the very same laws he had broken, and he will be part of those voting for or against those laws. In the case of JP Hlophe, the law is silent, which is, to some extent, equivalent to the law that allows McKenzie to be eligible to be part of Parliament and serve as a minister. The entry point to the position JP Hlophe occupies is being a member of Parliament in good standing, being nominated by Parliament members, and if he met that criterion, I think it is pointless to argue. On the other hand, he is not expected to make any sole decisions or appointments as a result of his nomination to the role he occupies.
the requirement of setting in the JSC is simple that one has to be an MP
Eish Ethical is none existing in politics....but in general the word ethical is overrated....we can discuss that until cows come home and back to the veld...that's same as having a law degree I'm sorry to be blunt....so conscious should be the measure or what guides an individual...as you have put it Sizwe if we go by word ethics no one would be in that parliament. Also as we're people we have a differing measure of ethics...so it's a very subjective word. Ayeye thanks as always....❤
Very well argued! I changed my mind on this and it is now firstly an issue of defending free speech for me. I do not think MPs should be disbarred for convictions and impeachment.
Having said that, Hlophe is clearly a compromised person defending his corrupt boss.
I'm surprised you can say, with a straight face, that he has sworn to defend the constitution when that clearly means nothing to him. His party aims to dismantle it.
My other criticism is that after waxing lyrical about the importance and power of an MP, who is one vote among hundreds, you downplay the much amplified voice of corrupt Hlophe on the JSC.
How do you feel about Glynnis?
@@baphithi I don't
All corrupt MPs should be OUT.
@@baphithi found not guilty. She's awesome.
Very good analysis there, balanced! I think the court should take your analysis and then give a verdict.
Dr must sit and correct the wrongs
The judges are avoiding Dr Hlophe fot not doing justice to him.After listening to Adv. Xulu i'm convinced that something is wrong with them?May be they are jelous and why now the person who was supposed to apologise to Dr Hlophe has not done so until now instead is leading the people who is advocating the removal of Dr Hlophe.Why must Dr Hlophe suffer indefinetly.I think that is cruelty on the part of those who hate him.
Please check up on positions in uberrima fides - he was found to have broken the public trust as bearer of the highest form of it - he belongs neither in parliament nor on the JSE.
Yes, he does not deserve a seat on the JSC
Sizwe help me on this one how do judges do deliberation. Why am sking is he tried to persuade other judges to make findings that are positive to JZ by so doing then he is unfit . Some plp who have been in jail we rehabilitate we give them second chance. Why do we not think that he has been rehabilitated and he will use his experience to do right thing now.
Hlophe is just a victim of political victimisation
Under NO circumstances; no excuse through ignorance because ge has enough knowledge. Do we need any more corrupt?
My daughter loves your intro song. I am forced to rewind it over and over or else...
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Or else she will Collect all her crayons and draw on your walls.
@MentalFacility-u7o 🤣 sounds about right. If she goes "na na na na" I know what to do. The problem is not all videos start with the full song so I had to remember which one does.
@@awene4675 'na na na na', Wow! 🤣🤣🤣😂😂 goodness me, baby girl knows her poison shame! Might be helpful to screen record.
@@MentalFacility-u7o 🤣 great idea! Thanks.
SILENCE as the Constitution sounds, thats GOLDEN
Take the lead Dr. John. case closed
Don't know how this is even a question
OMW there's that and then most comments here
Yet again you make a compelling and convincing argument which I reluctantly have to agree with. I do believe that the will of the people should be the ultimate authority on all matters of state. So if 15% of the nation has decided that they want MK to be in power, then so it should be. I do however believe that positions in parliament and the cabinet should be made known before people vote. In this case I don't think it would make a difference unfortunately, But I would love it in future if parties are obligated before the elections to say "this is who would be our representative for minister of finance, speaker of the house etc to be" so that 1. These types of questions do not come up after the fact and 2. People know who they are essentially appointing to the various roles.
My other critique of this situation is one that I think needs future considerations:- At what point do we as a society hold people accountable ethically? It may not be illegal or unconstitutional for Hlophe to hold this office, but as you pointed out, this is an individual who was impeached. I think that is something very important to take into account. We need ethics to play as important a role as legality. Qualifications aside, moral and character are important.
Nor should julius Malema and FLOYD shivambu for their role in VBS
From my opinion. The parliamentary strategy behind MKp is a continuation of the wounded animal approach. Thus they would from my opinion continue to seek methods to activate the wounded animal narrative, for the foreseeable future.
Mnx
even if the Contitution can be looked at as a whole, the legislature would have expressely said so.
Sizwe❤
I LOVE YOUR CHANEL❤❤❤
Thank you!
I just don't think its rational for members of the executive to be exempted from the "fit and proper" standard. I've never understood how offices with such a high duty of care in the executive aren't treated with the same standard as the judiciary and other professions in South Africa.
To professionalise the public service ultimately means to be held to a higher standard as a consequence of the higher duty of care. Legal practitioners, Magistrates and Judges are regularly held to this higher standard of fit and proper, with unique sanctions such as suspension or removal from the roll.
We constantly bemoan the fact that MP's implicated in malfeasance never seem to face consequences. I personally don't have any beef with Judge Hlope. I think we should just be consistent with the principals of what it means to be fit and proper in the context of members of the executive.
I hate to single out Judge Hlope with this argument. But, "What's good for the goose..."
I think this standard should be applied to all members, President Ramaphosa included
But ex convicts are making laws in parliament....
The list system is relevant here, Hlope was not on the list at the time of the election. He was not really elected. He was added after the election.
All parties do that, it's essentially anti democratic in that we the people do not select our representative, some party officials do.
No matter what, a wrong is a wrong 😮
Hi Sizwe? Are you still uploading to spotify?
These people have a president who was found with a foreign currency, has not explained how and why but they have a problem with Hlophe?
He has a game farm and a lodge which also accepts dollars as payment currency. Idk why it is hard to fathom?
All this is GOD plan Doctor Hlope God is with you,Good Luck .MK❤❤❤
Like Junior Khanya…. “ fixing South Africa politics….”
Whether his impact in parliament is small or great it is still a problem that he would be allowed to secure that R1 million rand salary from taxpayers, and the government seems to consistently have people in powerful positions in government who do not deserve that role. Even if it is legally allowed it is an ethical problem. What do you think?
We as citizens we need him and experience he's got and help us povo. DA has people who has done worse things
Sizwe thanks for your learned analysis, however, being black alone carries its own stigma should there be any shadow of doubt on your character is an immenant vindication.
How can the corrupt be active in the judiciary
Yes he should be allowed to sit on the JSC, he is extremely competent but the NGO Freedom under Law and DA Adv Glynnis Breytenbach have an axe too grind with him.
Dr .Hlophe will recuse himself from JSC interviews if there is a conflict of interest when faced with Judges who appear before the JSC that are involved in litigation that he conducts. Its hypocritical that President Ramaphosa needed impeachment in parliament for money laundering and impropriety in the Phala Phala case but their was no such outrage . This is a case of selective morality.