Ramaphosa: The Constitution is a guardian watching over SA's legal health
JOHANNESBURG - President Cyril Ramaphosa has described the Constitution as a guardian that has been watching over the nation's legal health.
Dignitaries gathered at Constitutional Hill on Friday to mark the 30th anniversary of the Constitutional Court.
Ramaphosa was the chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly, which was tasked with drafting the new Constitution in 1994.
On Friday, while delivering the keynote address at the 30th anniversary of the apex court, Ramaphosa recalled the steps that led towards the finalisation of the country's supreme law.
"Speaking in my capacity, then, as chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly, I described this, our Constitution, as our new nation's birth certificate, reflecting the history from which we have emerged and the values of human dignity, equality, and freedom that we now cherish."
He said that Friday's festivities called for more than just celebration but also reflection.
A packed programme has been prepared for Friday's celebration, with dialogues expected to reflect on significant judgments by the Constitutional Court, such as State vs Makwanyane, which led to the abolition of the death penalty.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
2 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Judge in Mapisa-Nqakula's corruption matter unhappy with progress of case
JOHANNESBURG - The judge presiding over the corruption case of former Defence Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula is unhappy with the progress of the case, following yet another appeared at the Pretoria High Court on Friday, where she faces 12 counts of corruption and one of money alleged that as defence minister, she solicited and received kickbacks, amounting to R4.5 million from a defence April, Judge Mokhine Mosopa made a ruling that Mapisa-Nqakula's lawyers should be given access to a Dequar Military Police docket. ALSO READ: Court denies corruption-accused Mapisa-Nqakula access to investigation diary This is the docket of the State's star witness, Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, where she is charged with corruption in a separate case was eventually struck off the court roll due to persistent delays, leading to Mapisa-Nqakula's lawyers suspecting she may have made a quid pro quo deal with the State. READ: High Court says State isn't infringing on Mapisa-Nqakula's right to a fair trial Prosecutor Paul Louw said that since the docket was from another court, he could not disclose it."I only received confirmation from my colleagues in the SCCU (Specialised Commercial Crimes Court), where the military matter was being held yesterday afternoon, that the docket is available to me as a member of the investigating director. I cannot disclose it, it must formally happen via the office of the national director of public prosecutions." Judge Mosopa adjourned the matter to 18 August for a progress report on the disclosure process.
The Herald
3 hours ago
- The Herald
Ramaphosa to make judiciary fully independent of justice department
Ramaphosa said the dependence of the judiciary on the government has been odd. 'A joint committee is now in action to finalise this whole process of the independence of the judiciary. It has been an anomaly of our constitutional architecture that we've had parliament as an independent institution in our constitution fully and properly recognised, and the executive — but the judiciary has on an unfair basis had to depend on government on a variety of matters from getting approval on the appointment of people and not even being in complete control of their own budget,' said Ramaphosa. 'This comes to an end now. The judiciary will be independent. We will ensure the judiciary is rightly constituted as an equal branch of the state, same level as the executive and the legislature.' At the meeting with the senior leaders of the judiciary led by the chief justice earlier this month, Ramaphosa and minister of justice Mmamoloko Kubayi committed to ensuring the independence of the state. 'Within the principle of the separation of powers, each arm of the state has a responsibility to co-operate with, and provide support to, the other arms of the state in giving full effect to our constitution. It requires, in particular, that we create conditions in which each arm of the state can fulfil their respective mandates without hindrance,' said Ramaphosa at the time. 'It is an opportunity to develop common approaches on issues that are critical to the effective functioning of the judiciary. At the core of our deliberations is our shared commitment to safeguarding and entrenching the independence of the judiciary and ensuring that it has the space and means to administer justice.' Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said as much as the judiciary has always been independent, some aspects including its finances have been under the department. 'It's always been independent but on some administrative aspects they were dependent on the department. So those administrative areas will now be fully managed by the judiciary as they should be,' he said. TimesLIVE
eNCA
3 hours ago
- eNCA
Concourt landmark rulings as it celebrates 30 years
JOHANNESBURG - This year marks 30 years since South Africa's highest court opened its doors not just as a courtroom and as a beacon of hope for justice, equality and Constitutional supremacy. Established after apartheid the Constitutional Court doors were first opened by former President Nelson Mandela in the land in 1995. Its first President was Justice Arthur Chaskalson under then Chief Justice Michael Corbett. Among the first justices on the bench were Richard Goldstone, Pius Langa and Ismail Mohamed. The court Chief Justice, Mandisa Maya. She takes over from Raymond Zondo, as the first woman to hold the position. According to Maya the ConCourt was entrusted with the responsibility to enforce constitutional limitations on the exercise of public power and safeguarding human rights. She was speaking at a celebratory event held in Braamfontein, Johannesburg on Friday. She says the court functions as an independent and impartial institution tasked to ensure compliance and provision of the constitution and serve as the ultimate arbiter of all constitutional matters. 📸| The 30th anniversary of the Constitutional Court. The @ConCourt is the apex court in South Africa and was established following the first democratic election in 1994. #GovZAUpdates — South African Government (@GovernmentZA) June 20, 2025 And over the three decades, it has done just that, handing down landmark rulings that transformed the law, protected rights and deepened constitutional democracy. Here are some of the most influential Constitutional Court rulings that changed South Africa. S v Makwanyane (1995) Issue: The death penalty Outcome: The death penalty is a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment and it should be declared unconstitutional. It was the court's first ruling. National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality v Minister of Home Affairs (1999) Issue - Same-sex marriage Outcome - The impact of discrimination on gays and lesbians is rendered more serious. And their vulnerability increased by the fact that they are a political minority, not able on their own to use political power to secure favourable legislation for themselves. This also led to the legalisation of same-sex marriage- the first in Africa. Government of the RSV v Grootboom (2000) Issue: Right to housing Outcomes: The state must devise and implement within its available resources a comprehensive and coordinated programme progressively to realise the right of access to adequate housing. Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign (2002) Issue - Inheritance under the African customary law of intestate succession Outcome - This ruling struck down male-only inheritance promoting gender equality. It found that the rule that male primogeniture wherein the eldest son inherits property was declared inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid, to the extent that it excludes women and extra-marital children from inheriting property. Bhe and Others v The Magistrate, (2004) Outcome - This ruling struck down male-only inheritance promoting gender equality. It found that the rule that male primogeniture wherein the eldest son inherits property was declared inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid, to the extent that it excludes women and extra-marital children from inheriting property.
