Some members have requested the legal interpretation of the Cape High court ruling passed on 23/01/2012 against Letlapa's appeal. It is the duty of a judge to interprete a case and issue a verdict, mine is not to change its meaning but, to simplify it as it may be too tecnical to some of us who are not legally sound. During 2010 Ipelegeng gathering, some members were expecting the event to be converted into a conference and others opposed the suggestion. Those who were in favour of the conference have been vindicated by this court verdict. I will handle two paragraphs which are the key to the ruling. Paragraphs[27] and [28], page 14 and 15 of the case, do clarify the 2000 PAC constitution which governs the suggestions to the amendment of the constitution prior to the conference or congress, in this scenario, Letlapa and his cronies failed to involve all branches in regard to the submission of proposals to the SG. Secondly, though the president may enjoy the power to suspend the constitution, at a certain point of time, the suspension must be lifted. The judgement further stipulates that, a power to suspend a constitution, is not a power to bring about changes to the constitution in an uncontitutional manner. The nullification of the Alice congress was therefore not a surprise to sober PAC members. In the same verdict, the judge even refers to Letlapa as the PAC former president. It must be noted that Letlapa was first elected as the party president in Freestate 2006 congress and as far as the 2000 PAC constittuion is concerned, his office-term has long been expired. Letlapa is officially no longer the PAC president, so he neither can suspend nor lift any constitution, it's too late for him. Jabu 079 229 4820
-- Sending your posting to [email protected] Unsubscribe by sending an email to [email protected] You can also visit http://groups.google.com/group/payco Visit our website at www.mayihlome.wordpress.com
