The Council for the Advancement of the Constitution (Casac) has asked to intervene in the high court application by the Democratic Alliance challenging government’s decision to withdraw South Africa from the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The DA and Casac launched urgent applications in the Constitutional Court on October 24 after International Relations and Co-operation Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane signed an “instrument of withdrawal” from the ICC on October 20.
Justice Minister Michael Masutha said a Bill would be tabled before parliament proposing the repeal of the local law which enjoins South Africa to arrest people who are wanted by the ICC for genocide‚ crimes against humanity and war crimes.
The DA had launched substantively the same papers in both the Constitutional Court and the high court in Pretoria on October 25.
The Constitutional Court‚ in an order dated November 11‚ concluding it did not have exclusive jurisdiction over the applications‚ dismissed the DA and Casac applications.
Casac‚ maintaining that the matter is one of great public importance‚ says it has elected to urgently apply to the high court to intervene as a co-applicant in the DA’s application.
Should Casac be permitted to intervene‚ it seeks the same relief sought by the DA — an order declaring that the notice of South Africa’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute of the ICC to be is inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.
Casac also seeks an order declaring that the Cabinet decision to withdraw from the Rome Statute be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.
According to Casac’s attorney‚ Nicki van‘t Riet‚ of Norton Rose Fulbright‚ the basis for Casac’s challenge was that the decision to withdraw from the ICC was unlawful‚ irrational‚ and in violation of the Constitution. The law firm is representing Casac without charge.
Nkoana-Mashabane told the United Nations of South Africa’s decision to withdraw from the ICC. But only the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces can approve or withdraw from international agreements‚ said Van‘t Riet.
She added that the ICC decision was irrational as it served no legitimate government purpose‚ and violated the responsibility of the state to protect‚ respect‚ promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights.
The matter is set to be heard by the full Bench of the high court on December 5.
Constitution council seeks to join DA’s court challenge to SA’s withdrawal from ICC
The Council for the Advancement of the Constitution (Casac) has asked to intervene in the high court application by the Democratic Alliance challenging government’s decision to withdraw South Africa from the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The DA and Casac launched urgent applications in the Constitutional Court on October 24 after International Relations and Co-operation Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane signed an “instrument of withdrawal” from the ICC on October 20.
Justice Minister Michael Masutha said a Bill would be tabled before parliament proposing the repeal of the local law which enjoins South Africa to arrest people who are wanted by the ICC for genocide‚ crimes against humanity and war crimes.
The DA had launched substantively the same papers in both the Constitutional Court and the high court in Pretoria on October 25.
The Constitutional Court‚ in an order dated November 11‚ concluding it did not have exclusive jurisdiction over the applications‚ dismissed the DA and Casac applications.
Casac‚ maintaining that the matter is one of great public importance‚ says it has elected to urgently apply to the high court to intervene as a co-applicant in the DA’s application.
Should Casac be permitted to intervene‚ it seeks the same relief sought by the DA — an order declaring that the notice of South Africa’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute of the ICC to be is inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.
Casac also seeks an order declaring that the Cabinet decision to withdraw from the Rome Statute be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid.
According to Casac’s attorney‚ Nicki van‘t Riet‚ of Norton Rose Fulbright‚ the basis for Casac’s challenge was that the decision to withdraw from the ICC was unlawful‚ irrational‚ and in violation of the Constitution. The law firm is representing Casac without charge.
Nkoana-Mashabane told the United Nations of South Africa’s decision to withdraw from the ICC. But only the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces can approve or withdraw from international agreements‚ said Van‘t Riet.
She added that the ICC decision was irrational as it served no legitimate government purpose‚ and violated the responsibility of the state to protect‚ respect‚ promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights.
The matter is set to be heard by the full Bench of the high court on December 5.
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