Why is the state appealing the parole given to Chris Hani's killer, Janusz Walus? Yesterday, following the justice minister's decision to appeal, constitutional law expert Professor Marinus Wiechers questioned the state's motives."While the prospects of success can go either way, I am circumspect about what will be gained from such action."The parole board made a recommendation, it went to the court and a decision was made. We must trust the court in its decision and the state must obey the court's decision."Wiechers said he believed the appeal was more a political matter, to show that Hani has not been forgotten and to keep the ideology of the struggle alive.The state, said Wiechers, could appeal on two grounds."One is that the judge misinterpreted the law, but in this case this is probably too far-fetched to argue. The other argument is the judge did not take all the facts into account."I simply cannot see how the Supreme Court of Appeal can find something different in terms of the law and say that the judge misinterpreted the facts, especially as she appears to have applied her mind thoroughly."However, a constitutional law expert, advocate Pierre de Vos, in his blog this month, said the decision to order the release of Walus on parole was badly argued and almost certainly wrong."The judgment should be appealed," he wrote.De Vos argued that the issue was not only whether Walus could ever be forgiven."The legal question is much narrower: did the minister of correctional services act unlawfully when he declined to grant Walus's parole last year? More pertinently, did the minister exercise his discretion in either an unreasonable or an irrational manner when he declined to grant Walus's parole?"He said Judge Nicolene Janse van Nieuwenhuizen seemed to have conflated an appeal - where a judge reconsiders the merits of a case - with a review, where the judge considers whether the decision was unreasonable or irrational...