The Department of Home Affairs has filed an extraordinary and unprecedented application before the Constitutional Court.
This in its ongoing battle to resist reopening the refugee reception office in Port Elizabeth‚ as it was ordered to do by the Supreme Court of Appeal in March.
The department wants the Constitutional Court to reconsider an order it made on August 5 dismissing the department’s application for leave to appeal against the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment.
Its application was dismissed after the department failed to meet the June 26 deadline set by the Constitutional Court to file its submissions.
The department filed its submissions on July 29 and asked the court to condone the late filing but the court dismissed both its condonation application as well as its application for leave to appeal.
In the application for reconsideration‚ the court is called upon to decide whether to hear the matter it had already judged‚ thus deviating from the legal doctrine of res judicata‚ which bars continued litigation of a matter that has been decided. It is also called upon to decide whether failure to observe its rules should be tolerated.
The department said its failure to file its submissions to the court on time was due to the “miscommunication” between the State Attorneys’ offices in Johannesburg and Pretoria.
Home Affairs director-general Mkuseli Apleni said that the directions to file submissions were never passed to him or anyone within his department in time to respond.
Apleni said it was profoundly unjust for protracted litigation between the parties on matters of grave national importance to be determined on the conduct of one of the parties’ legal representatives.
The matter has its genesis in 2011‚ when the Somali Association of SA challenged Apleni’s decision of October 2011 to close the Port Elizabeth refugee reception office.
Two high court decisions set aside Apleni’s decision and in March this year‚ the SCA also dismissed the department’s appeal. This prompted the department to approach the Constitutional Court to apply for leave to appeal.
In his affidavit before the court filed last month‚ Apleni said the circumstances of this case were exceptional and warranted the reconsideration of this court’s order in the interests of justice.
However‚ the Somali Association of South Africa (Eastern Cape) “strenuously” opposed the application for the reconsideration and setting aside of the August 5 order.
David Cote‚ an attorney employed by Lawyers for Human Rights and who represents the association‚ said granting the department’s application undermined the association’s entitlement to finality in this litigation and the effective vindication of its rights.
The court has not issued any directions in this matter.
Home Affairs in final bid to fight order to reopen refugee office
The Department of Home Affairs has filed an extraordinary and unprecedented application before the Constitutional Court.
This in its ongoing battle to resist reopening the refugee reception office in Port Elizabeth‚ as it was ordered to do by the Supreme Court of Appeal in March.
The department wants the Constitutional Court to reconsider an order it made on August 5 dismissing the department’s application for leave to appeal against the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment.
Its application was dismissed after the department failed to meet the June 26 deadline set by the Constitutional Court to file its submissions.
The department filed its submissions on July 29 and asked the court to condone the late filing but the court dismissed both its condonation application as well as its application for leave to appeal.
In the application for reconsideration‚ the court is called upon to decide whether to hear the matter it had already judged‚ thus deviating from the legal doctrine of res judicata‚ which bars continued litigation of a matter that has been decided. It is also called upon to decide whether failure to observe its rules should be tolerated.
The department said its failure to file its submissions to the court on time was due to the “miscommunication” between the State Attorneys’ offices in Johannesburg and Pretoria.
Home Affairs director-general Mkuseli Apleni said that the directions to file submissions were never passed to him or anyone within his department in time to respond.
Apleni said it was profoundly unjust for protracted litigation between the parties on matters of grave national importance to be determined on the conduct of one of the parties’ legal representatives.
The matter has its genesis in 2011‚ when the Somali Association of SA challenged Apleni’s decision of October 2011 to close the Port Elizabeth refugee reception office.
Two high court decisions set aside Apleni’s decision and in March this year‚ the SCA also dismissed the department’s appeal. This prompted the department to approach the Constitutional Court to apply for leave to appeal.
In his affidavit before the court filed last month‚ Apleni said the circumstances of this case were exceptional and warranted the reconsideration of this court’s order in the interests of justice.
However‚ the Somali Association of South Africa (Eastern Cape) “strenuously” opposed the application for the reconsideration and setting aside of the August 5 order.
David Cote‚ an attorney employed by Lawyers for Human Rights and who represents the association‚ said granting the department’s application undermined the association’s entitlement to finality in this litigation and the effective vindication of its rights.
The court has not issued any directions in this matter.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos