After having her application to block a meeting to be held tomorrow, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela is now planning to approach the Constitutional Court to have the matter heard.
This after acting deputy judge president Zamani Nhlangulela refused to grant the certificate of urgency yesterday when Madikizela-Mandela’s lawyers brought another application.
The matter had been struck off the roll on Tuesday with Nhlangulela saying Madikizela-Mandela had abused the system by saying the matter was urgent.
This after the executors of Nelson Mandela’s estate were not joined in the application initially.
In a strong worded statement sent last night through her lawyers, Madikizela-Mandela wrote: “I instructed my attorneys to urgently join the executors in the application and reinstate the matter.
“Most unfortunately or fortunately a certificate of urgency issued by my lawyers according to the court rules to have the matter reinstated was submitted to the same judge who upon receipt of the certificate refused to reinstate the matter.”
Nhlangulela refused to grant the certificate of urgency yesterday stating that failure to cite the executors in the proceedings was an abuse of procedure.
Madikizela-Mandela also took a jab at Nhlangulela, questioning his credibility on the matter after he reportedly referred to Mandla Mandela, the first respondent in the matter, as “chief”.
“The executors were represented in court and did file an affidavit expressly stating that they have no material interests in the matter and for that reason shall not participate in the proceedings pertaining to the urgent interdict of the meeting.”
She wrote that she found it “strange” that Nhlangulela alleged she abused the court process by not including the executors.
“In any event the case I am pursuing involves senior judges of the country in that the deputy chief justice and the Judge President of the Eastern Cape is directly involved.
“The judge that presided over the matter in the Eastern Cape is an acting deputy judge president who obviously reports in terms of court administration directly to the judge president who is part of the opposing respondents in the case that I launched in the high court.”
She said Nhlangulela’s refusal to reinstate the matter as urgent infringed on the Constitution.
“I personally fought for the constitution and the independence of the judiciary which at times I suspect is being compromised,” she wrote.
Madikizela-Mandela stated that her case cannot be reported to the judge president as he has direct interest in the matter.
“In a nutshell the matter shall be taken to the Constitutional Court because the judge in Mthatha refuses me access to courts and justice.”
Winnie turns to Concourt
This after acting deputy judge president Zamani Nhlangulela refused to grant the certificate of urgency yesterday when Madikizela-Mandela’s lawyers brought another application.
The matter had been struck off the roll on Tuesday with Nhlangulela saying Madikizela-Mandela had abused the system by saying the matter was urgent.
This after the executors of Nelson Mandela’s estate were not joined in the application initially.
In a strong worded statement sent last night through her lawyers, Madikizela-Mandela wrote: “I instructed my attorneys to urgently join the executors in the application and reinstate the matter.
“Most unfortunately or fortunately a certificate of urgency issued by my lawyers according to the court rules to have the matter reinstated was submitted to the same judge who upon receipt of the certificate refused to reinstate the matter.”
Nhlangulela refused to grant the certificate of urgency yesterday stating that failure to cite the executors in the proceedings was an abuse of procedure.
Madikizela-Mandela also took a jab at Nhlangulela, questioning his credibility on the matter after he reportedly referred to Mandla Mandela, the first respondent in the matter, as “chief”.
“The executors were represented in court and did file an affidavit expressly stating that they have no material interests in the matter and for that reason shall not participate in the proceedings pertaining to the urgent interdict of the meeting.”
She wrote that she found it “strange” that Nhlangulela alleged she abused the court process by not including the executors.
“In any event the case I am pursuing involves senior judges of the country in that the deputy chief justice and the Judge President of the Eastern Cape is directly involved.
“The judge that presided over the matter in the Eastern Cape is an acting deputy judge president who obviously reports in terms of court administration directly to the judge president who is part of the opposing respondents in the case that I launched in the high court.”
She said Nhlangulela’s refusal to reinstate the matter as urgent infringed on the Constitution.
“I personally fought for the constitution and the independence of the judiciary which at times I suspect is being compromised,” she wrote.
Madikizela-Mandela stated that her case cannot be reported to the judge president as he has direct interest in the matter.
“In a nutshell the matter shall be taken to the Constitutional Court because the judge in Mthatha refuses me access to courts and justice.”
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 Now
Latest Videos