• All Share : 50050.68
    UP 0.47%
    Top40 - (Tradeable) : 43919.02
    UP 0.62%
    Financial 15 : 15795.31
    UP 0.67%
    Industrial 25 : 63378.16
    UP 1.42%
    Resource 10 : 39876.28
    DOWN -2.02%

  • ZAR/USD : 11.4455
    DOWN -0.04%
    ZAR/GBP : 17.1592
    UP 0.07%
    ZAR/EUR : 12.8824
    UP 1.00%
    ZAR/JPY : 0.0965
    DOWN -0.41%
    ZAR/AUD : 9.0744
    UP 0.64%

  • Gold US$/oz : 1283.16
    DOWN -0.86%
    Platinum US$/oz : 1255.75
    DOWN -1.02%
    Silver US$/oz : 18.02
    DOWN -1.58%
    Palladium US$/oz : 768.75
    DOWN -0.89%
    Brent Crude : 47.91
    DOWN -1.80%

  • All data is delayed by 15 min. Data supplied by Profile Data
    Hover cursor over this ticker to pause.

Mon Jan 26 12:27:30 SAST 2015

ANCWL's outcry over Pistorius is hypocritical: iLIVE

Dumisani Lloyd Mkhize | 26 February, 2013 10:10
Pistorius awaits the start of court proceedings in the Pretoria Magistrates court
"Blade Runner" Oscar Pistorius awaits the start of court proceedings in the Pretoria Magistrates court.
Image by: SIPHIWE SIBEKO / REUTERS

Let me start by saying that I hold no brief for Oscar Pistorius, but I find the conduct of the ANCWL very hypocritical.

According to reports on Times LIVE, the ANCWL is calling for an explanation as to why Pistorius is getting special treatment by being allowed to stay in the Brooklyn Police Station holding cells as opposed to Central Prison or Newlock like all other awaiting trial or awaiting bail prisoners.

They claim that if there is some special circumstance that permits this, authorities must share this with the public as they are setting a bad precedent.

That is very rich coming from an organisation that

  • Went to court to support a man charged with raping an HIV positive woman
  • Attacked and vilified the accuser, shouting slogans like “Burn the bitch!”
  • Supported their government’s decision to keep Schabir Shaik in hospital instead of prison (after being found guilty)
  • Supported the release of this convict under dubious circumstances
  • Supported the election and re-election of a person who avoided facing corruption charges in court

Who is setting a bad precedent then?

Why doesn’t the dictum “innocent until proven guilty” apply to Oscar, just as they were vociferous when asking the public to apply it to Zuma?

Why are they not fighting for the rights of that exiled poor woman – the child of Zuma’s friend who regarded him as an uncle, yet Zuma saw it fit to have unprotected sex with her in spite of the woman being HIV positive?

SHARE YOUR OPINION

If you have an opinion you would like to share on this article, please send us an e-mail to the Times LIVE iLIVE team. In the mean time, click here to view the Times LIVE iLIVE section.