CCT54/09

[2010] ZACC 4

2010 (3) SA 293 (CC)

2010 (2) SACR 101 (CC)

2010 (5) BCLR 391 (CC)

Ngcobo CJ

Froneman J separate judgment

10 November 2009

23 February 2010

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3590

This case arises out of an application for leave to appeal directly to the CC and an application for direct access to the CC. Application for leave to against an order of the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria which granted an interim interdict: Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others Case No 15320/09, North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, 29 April 2009, as yet unreported. The application for direct access is for an order declaring invalid section 1 of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (PAJA)

constitutional challenge to the exercise of the Presidential pardon power under section 84(2)(j) of the Constitution in so far as the President was to grant pardon without receiving representations from victims. The Court found that the exercise of the power to grant pardon must be rationally related to the purpose sought to be achieved by it. In this instance the objective of the special dispensation process was national unity and national reconciliation, and the dispensation process was to be guided by the criteria, principles and spirit that underpinned the Truth and Reconcilation Commission amnesty process. The Court held that, given our history, victim participation in accordance with the principles of the TRC was the only rational means to contribute towards national reconciliation and national unity; and further that victims were entitled to make representations before the President made the decision to grant a pardon under special dispensation. However, it was emphasized that this did not apply to other categories of applications for pardon. Judgment: Ngcobo CJ (unanimous).