[ad_1]
Western Cape Prime Minister Helen Zille launched a lawsuit to obtain the protest report of Busisiwe Mkhwebane, a public protectorate, and in doing so, the controversial leader once again defended his infamous tweets on colonialism. In 2017, Zille spoke on Twitter to explain how colonialism had helped the South Asian nation prosper, detailing how the legacy of colonialism in South Africa had been positive.
"What a revelation Singapore has been, I can see why it's prospering.
"For those who claim the legacy of colonialism was ONLY negative, think of our independent judiciary, transportation infrastructure, channeled water, etc.," she said at the time. AFP. response to South African critics.
The case of Zille is based on the constitutional right to freedom of expression. Mkhwebane found in his report, dated June 11, that Zille had violated the Constitution and the Code of Ethics because of the public comments she had made on the legacy of colonialism.
The prime minister seeks to prevent the corrective action of Mkhwebane from being implemented. Zille also asked the court for findings and corrective measures to consider and set aside.
In his report, Mkhwebane concluded that Zille's tweet posed an imminent threat of violence, violating article 16 (2) (b) of the Constitution. The article states that freedom of expression is protected in South Africa, unless it includes propaganda for war, the threat of violence or incitement to violence. hatred for a group of people who would cause harm
. refutes Mkhwebane's claim that she violated the Constitution, calling her tweets an "act of public dialogue".
"My tweets do not belittle, degrade, or marginalize a person's intrinsic worth, humanity, or dignity. On the contrary, the tweets inspired a frank and open debate: this act of public dialogue and debate is itself constructive of human dignity and moral commitment, "said Zille in his affidavit.
She also stated that the public protector had no evidence that her tweets incited violence and that anyone felt physically threatened.
His tweets also do not infringe on his duty to act in the interest of good governance – as provided by the code of ethics, as they "do not have undermined good governance, "she said.
Sorry Not Sorry
In his court papers, Zille acknowledges that his views on colonialism offended many in South Africa. She was forced to apologize to the Democratic Alliance after the party determined that she had broken her rules on social media. She was also suspended from party activities.
Despite the decision made against her by her own party, Zille's point of view on the subject remains unchanged.
"… Despite the global negativity of colonialism, his legacy has left us with some levers that can be reoriented to eradicate oppression, exploitation, racism and poverty – from the beginning. a way that Singapore has managed to do "she said in her court papers.
She added that the excuses she made to South Africans were because they had misunderstood her tweets. This was not an admission of guilt, she said.
"My apologies were made for a possible misconception that tweets were a justification for colonialism, a totally unintentional misconception, as will be shown by an objective reading of my tweets. my apologies did not constitute an admission that I had infringed on the dignity of persons. "
Legal experts, for their part, examined Mkhwebane's report on Zille, claiming that the public protector had misapplied the law in this case
"While many South Africans have been offended by Zille's tweets, tweets certainly do not constitute the hate speech form that the Constitution outlaws in section 16 of the Bill of Rights," said Phephelaphi Dube, director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, says News24. "Under the Constitution and the law on the Protector of the Citizen, the Protector of the City Dean is responsible for investigating reprehensible behavior, both in state affairs and in public administration. In this regard, the Human Rights Commission is better placed to investigate alleged violations of the Bill of Rights.
The Public Protector is criticized for the number of reports that have been submitted to judicial review since her appointment. In total, the Mkhwebane office spent at least R15 million defense reports that were taken into account.
[ad_2]
Source link
