42 stories on 2 stations in the last 30 days · all stationsfinding more
you have satisfied that, so meaning you have passed the procedural hurdle, it must be sent to the Constitutional Court in order for the Constitutional Court to determine whether the amendment is constitutional. Then the basic factor doctrine will come in and
Home affairs. Home affairs is abiding by a court ruling. The Constitutional Court said one, two, three. And the Constitutional Court, as I've been saying, that the Constitutional Court is implementing interpreting the laws. But the thing about what we also,
Good afternoon. I'm Komocho Mabelani. Government could head to court to obtain a supervisory order on a Constitutional Court ruling on asylum seekers. Chairperson of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration, Mamoloko Kubai, says the government has been
Done ahead of the disaster that we saw. But there's a point that you made earlier on around the Constitutional Court ruling, and that the Constitutional Court ruling did not take into consideration the views of South Africans. How do you expect the
Constitutional Court, was it yesterday? Yeah, the Constitutional Court, you know, no, the day before yesterday, you know, the Constitutional Court, adult men were arguing what it means to upload and submit. They were arguing, it was a serious argument. A full
State. That's number one. Number two, what the courts or the Constitutional Court has said, there's certain paragraphs, I can't read them out. There's two parts. They've confirmed the Western Cape decision of 15 May 2025. That's what the Constitutional Court
must step up on this particular matter. They must be in charge. Though withdrawing or postponing the constitutional court, I mean, the instruction of the constitutional court decision is not going to change anything. We are a constitutional democracy. Whatever
over the asylum application system, and protesters are expected to hand over a memorandum at the court. Our SABC new senior reporter, Criselda Lewis, is there. Criselda, good afternoon. So, just give us a sense of what's happening on the ground outside the
talking about. There is a lady by the name of Batabile Yamini, a minister of social development. The Constitutional Court ordered her to effect changes that company that was paying the SAFA grant. She didn't act for two years. She defied the Constitutional
it. You know, you continue, and I mean, I see a lot of people are saying that this is linked to the Constitutional Court judgment, you know, or what people understand of the Constitutional Court judgment. I mean, those people that were burning cars, if you
Act and the Constitutional Court merely corrected the process that Home Affairs were using, sadly, opportunistically, to prohibit asylum seekers from applying. So, when they made the decision in July, the apex court, the Constitutional Court spoke and said,
Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration says it is a way of panic and confusion following the recent Constitutional Court judgment on asylum seekers and the Refugees Act. Now, the Korn Court, the Constitutional Court, ruled that parts of the Refugee Act were
Constitutional Court, after a couple of conflicting judgments by the High Court, the Constitutional Court found in July this year that an amendment to the Refugee Act, which said that people who didn't have proper documentation or didn't come into the country
6 p.m. to 6 p.m. All right, we're getting. What are we going to do next? Oh, we're going to go to the Constitutional Court. There's this Constitutional Court hearing. The IEC and the ANC are arguing about the election lists. Remember, this is the lists in, was
Appeal this to the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court declines to hear the appeal because it says that the law on the technical question of whether you can order specific performance in terms of a contract is a settled question of law and therefore
75+ stories on 2 stations in the last 30 days · all stations
Constitutional Court, was it yesterday? Yeah, the Constitutional Court, you know, no, the day before yesterday, you know, the Constitutional Court, adult men were arguing what it means to upload and submit. They were arguing, it was a serious argument. A full
It may be that another judgment in the Constitutional Court down the line would find another reasoning because there's so many Constitutional Court decisions. But overall, the protection afforded by the Constitution is extended to everyone within the borders
The law and deliver to the public of South Africa. We cannot take aim at the Constitutional Court for doing what courts do, whether it's at the high courts, the SCA, or the Constitutional Court. That is, it is not their role to be basically to officiate over
Should she not? So, this is a concourse judgment. The constitutional court is the apex court. So, you cannot appeal or you can't change the decision of the constitutional court. So, what would happen in this instance is perhaps if someone then comes to court
Constitutional court speaks to the law as it exists. The people who have a right or who have the ability to change the makeup of the law in general are those fellows who are in parliament. Now, what the Constitutional Court does is to look at what the law says
you have satisfied that, so meaning you have passed the procedural hurdle, it must be sent to the Constitutional Court in order for the Constitutional Court to determine whether the amendment is constitutional. Then the basic factor doctrine will come in and
Do not need the Constitutional Court because what is their use? Says men take KG. Among many benefits to us as citizens of our constitutional democracy, empowers an independent judiciary to strike down unlawful government actions and protect citizens against
Home affairs. Home affairs is abiding by a court ruling. The Constitutional Court said one, two, three. And the Constitutional Court, as I've been saying, that the Constitutional Court is implementing interpreting the laws. But the thing about what we also,
Constitutional Court is not our final arbiter. It is the parliament that is those that we vote for. We need to revisit them. They need to revisit the constitution. The constitution must change to suit us. Good afternoon, Asboh. Asponiwa, you know, it just
Good afternoon. I'm Komocho Mabelani. Government could head to court to obtain a supervisory order on a Constitutional Court ruling on asylum seekers. Chairperson of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration, Mamoloko Kubai, says the government has been
Done ahead of the disaster that we saw. But there's a point that you made earlier on around the Constitutional Court ruling, and that the Constitutional Court ruling did not take into consideration the views of South Africans. How do you expect the
On the constitutional court and zoom more into them and their judgment and the manner in which their judgment is undermining South African law, the constitution in general. That's why, on a daily basis, we are going to find people, all of us, more especially
Constitutional Court weighs in on it and they make a ruling based on the Constitution. I mean, clearly, that's the function of the Constitutional Court, right? It's supposed to be bringing clarity on these things. And as you say, part of what it must take into
State. That's number one. Number two, what the courts or the Constitutional Court has said, there's certain paragraphs, I can't read them out. There's two parts. They've confirmed the Western Cape decision of 15 May 2025. That's what the Constitutional Court
Constitutional courts need to take time and listen to what South Africans are saying, and they need to take that time. You can't make such decisions that are going to impact our country. Meanwhile, how ten Judge President Obri Li Dwaba has turned to a full
2 569 mentions across 6 stations, last 30 days
Named in these moments, most often first
Each opens the place's own page
4 030 older mentions across 5 months on 4 stations. Sign in to search the archive.
What radio said
A full bench of Constitutional Court justices heard arguments on what it means to upload and submit 1. Commentators said the court interprets and applies the law as it exists, and that changing the law is for Parliament 5, while a SAfm commentator noted its judgments are final and cannot be appealed 4.
AI summary of the moments below, cited by number. Verify before quoting.