From: shaze@cs.ubc.ca (Scott Hazelhurst)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Is this justice? (was Re: Interview: Joseph...)
Date: 9 Jan 1993 17:41:27 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: empress.cs.ubc.ca

gavan@elc.mth.uct.ac.za (Gavan Tredoux) writes:
>shaze@cs.ubc.ca (Scott Hazelhurst) writes:
>: The South African justice system is hardly something to boast about.
>: That there are and always have been some very good judges, doesn't
>: cover up for the fact that there have been some shocking ones.
>: And the same thing applies (and more so) to the magistrates.
>: (This isn't even addressing the question of the laws they had
>: to judge on, but what they were/are like).
>: 
>: The more this gets pointed out the better. You don't need extensive
>: legal experience to have _some_ idea of what justice is about.

>Blah blah blah. More question begging. Could be the sentence was
>quite appropriate, maybe it wasn't. Lynch mobs have very definite
>ideas about what JUSTICE is about. Er, tempered with mercy
>and all that. Ja, well, read the court record Scotty? Know the
>facts of the case? Not likely. Ah well, that's never stopped
>you in the past.
>Oh no! diatribe warning: apartheid blah blah race blah blah injustice
>blah blah treason trial blah blah sharpeville six blah blah hanging
>blah blah delmas blah blah ....

Oh Gavan, don't be so hysterical.

My comments were clearly directed at the South African justice
system as a whole rather than a particular case. I am quite aware
of the danger of taking one case and drawing adverse inferences
from that. It's an unfortunate legacy that we have that we
don't have to take one case, we can take many (in fact if one
were to take the standard of 'justice' demonstrated by the legal
profession when dealing with pass law contraventions alone, there
are millions of cases which justify adverse inferences, although
it's much more popular in certain circles to point to the handful
of cases like the Rikhoto judgement to assure ourselves that the
judiciary is great!).

Perhaps in this case the sentence was appropriate.
The problem is that the South African legal system has displayed
such extremes of prejudice when it comes to its operation that
a case like the one which started this whole discussion off
where the sentence is seemingly light does not come as a surprise. 
For that reason it does not come as a surprise that people assume that 
it is the basis for that decision was racial (however, if you 
read my posting I didn't make that assertion).

To repeat what I said (please read what I said, don't make up
what you would like me to say): the more it gets pointed out
that there have been some shocking judges and magistrates the 
better. The more it gets pointed out that the legal system
is not something to boast about the better. And you don't need
to be a legal expert to know this or to point this out. If you
don't like the judicial system being attacked for racial bias
(and I don't) the solution is to make sure that there is no reason
for such allegations to be made.

If, however, you do wish to discuss the merits of particular
cases, I am willing to do this. I am surprised though that even you
would think it necessary to defend the record of the judiciary
in cases such as the Delmas case or in hangings, or the many other
cases which show the problems with the system and the individuals
in the system.



>Ironic: when the offender is black, call for `mercy'; when the
>offender is white, call for `justice'. 

It would be ironic if it were true. It's not. Do you have any
evidence at all to support this assertion? Or perhaps the facts
don't matter.




Scott






-- 
---shaze@cs.ubc.ca----------------------------------------------------------
   Scott Hazelhurst    
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african