STATEMENT
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL

ON THE 4™
OF APRIL 2007 AT THE CLOSE OF SESSION

This
Court has been the subject of some public comment in respect of a
judgment we delivered in a matter which I cite under its
number C of
A (CIV) No.1 of 2007. The appeal related to the resolution of a
dispute concerning which of the two party lists submitted
to the
I.E.C. was the one lawfully submitted. The I.E.C. accepted the one
list and rejected the other. The High Court per Mahase
AJ reversed
the decision of the I.E.C. The respondent then appealed this decision
to us. The Court consisting of myself, Ramodibedi
and Majara JJA
upheld the appeal. Mahase AJ was clearly wrong in overturning the
decision of the I.E.C.

There can
be no question that this Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
This was not an election petition. Indeed there was
no limitation of
any kind on the powers of this Court to hear and decide the appeal.
Once it was clear that we had jurisdiction,
both parties very
sensibly asked us to resolve the matter and we did so at their
request.

2

The
Attorney-General and the Director of Public Prosecutions have both
deprecated the attacks on the dignity of this Court and its
Judges.
They have reaffirmed their support for this Court and unquestionably
accept that the Court administers justice without
fear, favour or
prejudice and that its integrity and independence is beyond question.

For this
we thank them and express our appreciation.

The Law
Society has through its President Mr. Mda and Messrs. Nathane and
Malebanye participated in public debate via the media
in which they
corrected some of the distortions and misconceptions concerning the
judgment.

We also
express our appreciation for their affirmation of our independence
and integrity.