Among all things to be considered these days, the LFN team almost completely missed the anniversary of the judgment by the High Court in Pretoria, declaring the DMA Regulations, better known as “Lockdown” measures, as unconstitutional and invalid. We recall that the government Minister in charge of pretty much everything, you-know-who, had been given two weeks to rectify her doings; to bring them in line with the Constitution. “How hard can this be,” everybody thought. We all know what happened instead.

“I still remember how happy people were and all the media and television interviews, announcing that the restrictions will soon be something of the past,” says LFN President Reyno De Beer. “None of us, I think, could ever have imagined that our Government could be that cruel. We would never have thought that they had such shameless disrespect to the People and the Courts to continue with the enforcement of the unlawful measures as they did. One year later, there is still no end in sight. The promise of 21 days was broken.”

Based on own experience and observations, LFN recently suggested that some courts appear to have become mere extensions of government. Which also means that some members of the judiciary, including judges, might no longer deserve our respect. The respect of the People, that is. The reason is simple: for a court to function, one must be able to presume the independence of the judge. Without this premise being generally intact, the legal system as we know it no longer exists.

Looking back, one recalls the only Judge who, at that time, didn’t blindly subscribe to the official narrative that was (and is) being pushed so hard by the mainstream media and the government. The milksops occupying many of the editorial cubicles quickly deployed the usual go-to friendlies, from clueless politicians to self-styled experts, to bribed academics. (At this point WITS University is specifically invited to sue us for libel.)

Editorials, news snippets, op-eds, interviews etc., created to lambast a judge and a judgment. We recall the term “imbecile” being mentioned. When facts fell short, a super-very dangerous virus and the story of a curve that wasn’t flat enough were held to substitute. The propaganda machinery in full force, lashing out at Justice Davis with sometimes vitriolic attacks. Was it because the judge had not fully and unconditionally identified with the narrative? Or was it because LFN might be put in a position to win the argument one day? Today we can clearly see that this was meant primarily as a warning: most specifically for other judges to not go astray.

We briefly recall that academic experts De Vos and Madonsela both hurriedly went public, stating that the LFN order would not last the appeal. Very funny. In this context: Madonsela herself blocked several attempts by the LFN President, when he invited her to an open debate about the Davis – judgment. Surprised?

In light of the rather unique method by which five judges of the Supreme Court of Appeal last week mis-handled the very appeal matter, one cannot help but wonder whether Justice Davis must not perhaps be considered to be one of the few independent judges left in position. Not because he once followed LFN’s argument, but because he furthered actual debate and discourse. Right now, the country could do with more of the same. “We will succeed, eventually,” De Beer states. “We believe that the court order was correct and that it came into effect. One of these days the Constitutional Court will have to accept the inevitable and confirm our argument.” In the meanwhile, LFN will continue to fight for the human rights of every person in South Africa.

---

Please consider making a voluntary donation of your choice in supporting our campaign to invest in your children’s future. LFN is the ONLY organisation that continuously opposes the Lockdown in our Courts and has pending matters before both the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court…   

Please consider making a voluntary donation to LFN through Mobipaid…

OR

Direct bank deposit to: Liberty Fighters Network, Capitec (Branch: 470010 / Swift: CABLZAJJ), Savings Acc. No. 1531241784

While those still guided by the mainstream were looking in the wrong direction last week, history was made in more ways than one in Bloemfontein and not in a good way. First, the unlawful persistence by members of the judiciary to insist in holding a so-called “virtual hearing” in a matter in which they were supposed to later hear argument regarding the legality of such hearings, had forced LFN to bring an application for the whole SCA bench, consisting of Navsa, Ponnan, Mbatha JJA and Rogers and Unterhalter AJJA, to recuse themselves. This has never happened before.

“By denying us a proper hearing in an open court, which still is the norm, the Supreme Court gave rise to our apprehension that they were not as independent as they should be,” President De Beer said. “Once the independence of an adjudicator can no longer be taken as granted, either someone else takes over or the judges must come out and state publicly why they believe that they are not biased.” Instead, all five judges decided to ignore the application and, by doing so, likely acted in violation of the Constitution, the law, their own Code of Conduct and, quite possibly, even the Judges’ Oath they once swore. This has also never happened before. However, the judges’ conduct, by proceeding unlawfully with the hearing, confirmed the bias of the court, of which even LFN itself had not been fully convinced before.

Please consider making a voluntary donation to LFN through Mobipaid…

LFN’s recusal application also mentions irregularities between the officers of that court and the administrative level, apparently with full knowledge of the very judges involved. At some stage, the court requested a virtual hearing to discuss the legality of a virtual hearing. “Absolutely hilarious,” De Beer commented. “If it was a comedy it would be called ‘Judge first, hear the argument later’. That’s just not how it works and they know it.“

Nobody can be forced against his will to partake in something unlawful. Hence, De Beer requested the five judges to excuse him from any further proceedings. “There is a huge difference between ‘asking to be excused’ from a hearing and ‘refusing’ to partake,” says De Beer in light of the disinformation being published by some outlets, falsely claiming that he had refused participation in his own and LFN’s hearing.

LFN remains true to its arguments and announces that it is no longer in a position to accept any outcome in any matter adjudicated by the SCA, if heard after 26 May 2021, until and unless the wrongs meted out to the organisation, its President, the South African public and, most importantly, to the judiciary itself have been fully rectified. In this context LFN informs the public that, following the illicit hearing, it has received heart-warming support from members of the judiciary and the legal fraternity, expressing their disgust of the judges’ conduct.

At this point, LFN is preparing a comprehensive plan of action to ensure the ongoing independence of the judiciary in South Africa in the interest of the People. Same may also involve national and international legal, criminal and fraud experts who are considering to assist the organisation in its fight. “Heads will roll,” De Beer promises.

---

Please consider making a voluntary donation of your choice in supporting our campaign to invest in your children’s future. LFN is the ONLY organisation that continuously opposes the Lockdown in our Courts and has pending matters before both the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court…

Please consider making a voluntary donation to LFN through Mobipaid…

OR

Direct bank deposit to: Liberty Fighters Network, Capitec (Branch: 470010 / Swift: CABLZAJJ), Savings Acc. No. 1531241784