Signed agreement between the DA (Theuns Botha) and third party regarding employment positions in Riversdal:

The Western Cape Government – not the DA is behind the illegal “take-over” of the Oudtshoorn Council! The famous 5 turncoats were apparently convinced to mutate their allegiances with hard cash (bribery) and cosy jobs (cadre deployment).

The Foolish Five change colours

EXTRACT FROM THE COURT STATEMENT OF EBRAHIM ISMAIL EBRAHIM IN THE FAMOUS TREASON TRAIL IN JANUARY 1989:

“I wonder in the future whether freedom Fighters should bother to even stand trial. It is painful to say the least that testimony of secret witnesses of despicable character who would sell their own souls for a sixpence is preferred over the testimony of respected leaders of our people.”

The political investigating website, O!O, has uncovered incriminating emails between DA leaders plotting the demise of the elected Oudtshoorn government.

The Western Cape Minister of Local Government, Anton Bredell, was not only aware of the plot, but was actually part thereof, even instructed the legal counsel to Premier Helen Zille, adv Koos Cilliers, to research legal strategy in subverting the Oudtshoorn Government.

The DA Head of Government Business, Theuns Botha, received Bredell’s advice and instructions and forwarded it to the Eden Executive Mayor, Wessie van der Westhuizen, who shared it with the DA Western Cape East Region Manager, Jaco Londt. Judging by the dismal quality and sheer irrelevance of the legal advice, one can only assume that there was a huge communication gap somewhere between the plotters as to what needed to be achieved and/or how to legally achieve it. Well it is either this or Helen Zille should seriously start considering a few staff changes.

The worrying aspect of this all is that senior Western Cape second sphere Government leaders plotted the overthrow of another legitimate government in the third sphere.

Here is the correspondence:

From Theuns Botha to Wessie van der Westhuizen:

Vir jou aandag

Theuns

From Anton Bredell to Theuns Botha:

Theuns

Onderstaande en aangeheg is wat Koos vir ons kon kry. Ek dink dit sal jou dalk help.

Anton

From Koos Celliers to Anton Bredell:

Minister

Ek het ‘n paar sake opgespoor maar die Hoogste Hof van Appel se beslissing in Northern Free State District Municipality v VG Matshai is nasionaal gesgahebbend.

In die saak wou die Speaker nie ‘n mosie op die agenda oor haar moontlike ontslag aanhoor nie en het eers probeer om die bespreking oor die mosie uit te stel en toe dit teenkanting kry, beslis dat die raad verdaag.

Die Speaker het die raadsaal verlaat en die res van die lede het voortgegaan, onder die tussentydse voorsitterskap van die Munisipale bestuurder (aldus hul besondere reels) en die Speaker ontslaan. Die Speaker was suksesvol in die Vrystaatse Hoerhof wat haar gelyk gegee het dat sy die vergadering kon verdaag. Die Appelhof het nie saamgestem nie.

Op par [19] tot [24] verduidelik die Appelhof dat nog die Grondwet nog die Strukture (of ander wet) die Speaker se magte voorskryf – dus moet mens vir gesag gaan kyk na wat die gemene reg hieroor te se het. Die gevolgtrekking waartoe die Appelhof geraak is dat die Speaker nie daardie bevoegdheid het nie.

Ek glo nie dat Oudtshoorn se Reglement sulke magte aan die Speaker gee nie. As ek reg is moet die Appelhof se seining hieroor nagevolg word.

Die Appelhof het ook die reg van die meerderheid om met die vergadering voort te gaan bevestig – sien par [16]. Oor wie moet voorsit (al is dit net vir die verkiesing van ‘n raadslid om aldus te ageer) is daar waarskynlik nie voorskrifte in Oudtshoorn se reglement nie. Mens sou m.i. dan kon steun op die sentimente uitgespreek deur Bozalek J in die Kaapse Hoerhofsaak: Overberg

District Municipality v Premier of the Western Cape waarna die Appelhof [The Premier of the Western Cape v Overberg District Municipality (801/2010) [2011] ZASCA 23 (18 March 2011)] in par [10] verwys, te wete dat die Munisiaple Bestuurder die taak kan verrig.

Ek vertrou dit help.

Beide Appelhofuitsprake is aangeheg.

Groetnis

Koos

Note that Celliers does not address the “Secretary of the Western Cape DA”, but the “Minister”.

This is not a DA plot. This is a Western Cape Government plot to overthrow the Government of Oudtshoorn.

One can hardly overstate the impact of this fact.

According to a Constitutional expert Bredell will have to resign. This is because of the tremendous Constitutional duties and responsibilities bestowed on him in terms of Sections 40 and 41 of the Constitution. Not only did he fail to comply with these duties, but did the exact opposite.

The coup d’état is obvious:

1. On May 10 already, Bredell threatened Administration when he accused the municipality of not fulfilling council resolutions relating to the severance packages of senior managers and not cooperating with the SAPD in its investigations of matters relating to the SIU investigation that was completed in February 2012.
2. The Executive mayor, Gordon April, issued a media release stating that the delay, for whatever reasons, or by whomever, in the publication of the Special Investigation Unit Report on Oudtshoorn is compromising the municipality’s ability to address past malfeasance.
3. The President promulgated the SIU investigation on February 4, 2011 and an interim report was presented to me on July 18, 2011 before the investigation was completed in February 2012.
4. April says that it is with grave concern that he has recently learned that the delay in publication may very well result in the unfortunate situation where certain offences may prescribe before the municipality can institute civil proceedings to recover ratepayer money, if indeed such action is demanded.
5. The Municipality has implored the Western Cape Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning; the Directorate: Specialised Support, Department of Local Government Western Cape Government; the Senior Forensic Lawyer charged with the Oudtshoorn investigation; a forensic investigative consultant on the Oudtshoorn investigation; and the Investigative Officer of the DPCI: Commercial Crime assigned to cases resulting from the Oudtshoorn investigation for information and data that may assist the municipality in addressing the alleged serious infractions found by the investigation.
6. It is abundantly clear, says April, even before the delayed publication of the report, that the offences identified occurred during the term of the last Municipal Manager appointed by the Democratic Alliance / Independent Democrat coalition government.
7. It is therefore with a sense of growing suspicion, continues April, that he had received the Minister’s admonition, that “it is quite apparent that Oudtshoorn Municipality is failing in its executive obligations… to deal with serious governance challenges.”
8. This while the Senior Forensic Lawyer charged with the Oudtshoorn investigation cautioned that “regulations promulgated ito the SIU Act determine that all information relating to SIU investigations remain confidential” and by implication that the publication of the final report must not be pre-empted.
9. The Minister even stooped to threats of “dissolving the Municipal Council in accordance with Section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution and to appoint an Administrator”.
10. And yet a senior functionary of the Western Cape Ministery of Local Government wrote the Municipality that he had taken notice “of the efforts of the municipality to obtain / act on the SIU Report.”
11. This functionary added, “In the past efforts to obtain the final report for Oudtshoorn and two other municipalities were unsuccessful… the reports have now moved from the SIU nationally to the presidency and I shall see what province can do”.
12. The Municipality is on record that it is important that officials, councillors, or suppliers found to be involved in any illegal activities be removed from the system so that evidence can not be manipulated. The Municipality has done everything in its power to date to obtain such critical information.
13. April claims that he has instructed the Acting Municipal Manager to leave no stone unturned in procuring the final SIU Report and to move expeditiously to address each and every finding and to ensure that every office bearer and senior official answers to the call to fight corruption, and to prevent and recover losses, in the continued hands-on management of serious governance challenges.
14. In his letter Bredell also refers to planning applications; the Cango Caves; and the appointment of the previous Municipal Manager as reasons to place Oudtshoorn under Administration.
15. A local newspaper also quoted Bredell’s intention to intervene by having Oudtshoorn’s administration managed by two Cogta and two Western Cape officials – a rogue joint venture by Bredell and National Cogta Minister Baloyi, ala Swellendam last year.

Have you ever seen a more obvious set up than this JEF asks?

It is expected that any opportunistic attempt at intervention will meet considerable resistance from the Oudtshoorn Municipality’s legal team.

Anton Bredell

In addition to his Constitutional breaches, Bredell is also clearly in breach of Section 105 of the Systems Act, which calls for an MEC to promote mechanisms, processes and procedures to assist local governments to manage their own affairs.

One of the founding members of The Justice and Equality Front, Me Mary-Anne Mngomezulu, stated that this matter will finally force the President of South Africa to summon a Commission of Enquiry into sedition charges against three Western Cape Ministers relating to the Bitou violence of May 2007 and thereabouts (see articles elsewhere on our site). She already brought the matter under various National Ministers’ attention who indicated that the matter will be dealt with in due course and through the proper channels.

The police investigation at the time revealed that the following persons/institutions were amongst the biggest donors to QMQ, the organisation responsible for the violence and riots:

• Donald Grant.
• Allan Winde.
• Theuns Botha.
• Plett Ratepayers Association.

Donald Grant and Theuns Botha

Alan Winde

When the investigating officer attempted to obtain affidavits from them to explain their involvement in the matter, the investigation came to an abrupt stop, the docket was sealed and delivered to police officers unbeknown to JEF, where it remained for almost a year in till the Cape Times picked up on the story and made inquiries in this regard. The following day the docket inexplicably arrived at the NPA without any (compulsory) entry in the investigation dairy. A few months later the NPA declined to prosecute, refused to investigate the matter further or to accept any further submissions on the matter. They also refused to divulge the content of the docket.

To this day the DA persistently denies any involvement with QMQ, or that they practice cadre deployment.

In this regard please note the following documents attached hereto:

• Signed memorandum of understanding between the DA and QMQ (the first agreement to which this document refers was unfortunately destroyed and no copies were ever made).
• Signed agreement between the DA and CI regarding employment positions in Riversdal.

Know your DA……….

The Western Cape Director of Public Prosecutions decided this week that prosecution in the infamous Plettenberg Bay Sedition case will not be instituted due to the following reasons:

• The allegations are vague.
•  There’s no substantive evidence.
•  Do not meet the description of the alleged offences (sedition and public violence).
•  There is not a reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution.

According to our law Sedition is committed when a number of people gather together with the intention of defying, challenging, subverting or assailing the authority of the state. All that is required is the intention to defy or subvert the authority of the state in some way. The prosecution must prove that an accused intended defiance or subversion and that this intention was shared by others.

Public violence consists of the unlawful and intentional commission, together with a number of people, of an act/s which assume serious dimensions and which are intended forcibly to disturb public peace and tranquillity or to invade the rights of others.

The sworn affidavits submitted by two formers leaders of the group who intended making Bitou ungovernable contained inter alia the following information:

• This campaign commenced with protest marches under the banner of SANCO.
• Part of this campaign consisted furthermore in the unlawful and organised invasion of Council land.

• These invasions were repelled by Court orders obtained by the Council in the Eastern Circuit Local Division of the High Court of South Africa.

• When the unlawful land invasion was stopped this was succeeded by again orchestrated and organised stoning of Councillors, Council property and Council personnel.
• Support for these unlawful activities have been drummed up by the organisers on the strength of false and malicious rumours being spread in the community accusing the Council of a lack of service delivery and the councillors of ineptitude and corruption.

• Since May 2007 the unlawful acts, however, became far more serious and ominous.

• Various prominent members of the ANC houses was burned down.
•  Lulama Mvimbi was attacked and his car was stoned.

• Various cars and assets were damaged or destroyed.

• Brummer was a councilor as well as Memory Booysen and they were at risk and were not to be seen with us.
• Brummer and Booysen was the link between us and the other sections.
• The aim was through disrupted campaigns and civil unrest to make the town ungovernable.
• Brummer was running the administration of the campaign with me. I used to write letters in his house and send emails from his computer.
• Memory was organising the funding for these groups with Brummer and they were all times fully aware and part of all the strategies of civil unrest in order to make the town ungovernable.

The NPA, before reaching the decision not to prosecute, declined to accept documentary proof of all the funders of this campaign from the investigating officer. Instead, he was relieved from the investigation and ordered to hand in the docket.

The NPA also declined to receive any further submissions or take any further affidavits from witnesses about the actions.

They also decided not to transfer the matter to the specialized branch within the NPA who deals exclusively with sedition and similar types of crimes.

The DA is not going to investigate the matter internally and no Commission of Inquiry is considered by the Western Cape Government.

The end result is that the public will never know what really happened during that dark and heartbreaking time of our town’s history.

The NPA’s mission and vision according to their website is: Justice in our society, so that people can live in freedom and security. Guided by the Constitution, we in the National Prosecuting Authority ensure justice for the victims of crime by prosecuting without fear, favour and prejudice and by working with our partners and the public to solve and prevent crime.

The Free State ANC has denied used poor whites as puppets to attract votes in next year’s elections, it was reported on Tuesday.

The Volksblad reported that more than 100 poor whites were given front row seats at the African National Congress’s recent elective conference in the Free State. While many of them wore T-shirts bearing the image of President Jacob Zuma, who is also president of the ANC, they told the newspaper they did not know who the ANC president was, and said they attended the conference only to get food parcels.

“I did not even know that we would be brought to the conference,” one of the visitors was quoted as telling the Volksblad.

According to the newspaper, Free State premier’s unit for minorities’ member Sandlana Smit had denied that the white delegates were part of a hire-a-white election strategy.

She reportedly said some of them would not know who Zuma was because they were too poor to have access to the media.

Smit said many white South Africans supported the ANC, but they did not publicly announce it for fear of being victimised.

JEF is convinced that quite a few white ANC supporters in the Garden Route will be in agreement with this legitimate fear, and may even bear witness to it.

Free State ANC spokesman Oupa Khaobane told Volksblad many white South Africans had complained that the ANC had neglected them, and that the group had been invited to experience ANC culture.

JEF remembers the following statement made by Gwede Mantashe in 2011:

“The ANC wants to increase its white membership to become truly non-racial, party,” secretary general Gwede Mantashe said.

“There is a big body in the Afrikaans community that is loyal to the Constitution and keen to make a contribution in building South Africa as a winning society. We would love 50% of white South Africans to vote for the ANC to fulfil our dream of becoming a truly non-racial party,” he told delegates.

 “The ANC had been engaging more aggressively with white communities, and found it easier to communicate with them through structures like the Afrikanerbond,” he said.

JEF believes the following two questions remain unanswered and should be debated:

1. Will whites who join the ANC be accepted and welcomed by the ANC?

2. Will the white community accept their decision and refrain from branding them as traitors and refrain from victimizing them? 

Throughout history, the greatest thinkers and innovators considered themselves “liberal,” while those stubbornly trying to preserve older ways, that actually thwarted greater liberty, equality and justice, were “conservative.”

Do a little research and you’ll see for yourself that there have been very few “conservative” heroes in world history. The great individuals and movements that the entire world still reveres today are liberal in orientation, always trying to knock down established “traditions,” that, in fact, were bad traditions.

Conversely, it is the “conservative” ideology that sought to conserve those bad traditions.

Conservatism throughout history has been the opponent of not just progress… but of liberty, equality and justice, as well.

One way to understand the vast chasm between liberal and conservative ideologies is to consider the general world-view that each side holds. Liberals have evolved to believe that we are one human family, all in this together, most (but not all) of us good-hearted, and that we should try to love and help each other where we possibly can. For liberals, it’s one for all, and all for one. Liberals really do believe in We the People.

Conservatives? Not so much. They are selfishly oriented, with a “we against the world” mentality. They believe that most of the people in the world are evil and out to get them, so they maintain strict barriers between themselves and all “others.”

It is because of the general support of both confirmed and proud liberals, true independents, as well as FauxCons (“moderate conservatives“ by their own definition, but in reality, fake and inauthentic) that the arc of history over the past 300 years has tilted dramatically toward liberal ideology, pushing aside many age-old conservative traditions and institutions.

This website aims to reach both liberals who are seeking a fuller understanding and grounding of their own ideology, and FauxCons, who are generally open to the rational truth. FauxCons are not only the largest contingent of people thinking of themselves as “conservative,” they are the most important… simply because they are less rigid in their thinking than the other types of conservatives. In a democratic governmental process, they can easily swing an election one way or the other.

It is true that FauxCons can be politically apathetic. Often they don’t pay that much attention to politics and social issues; they’re too busy leading their lives. They are not always as well informed as they should be on the issues (including, importantly, the real differences between liberals and conservatives). And they, like all of us, are susceptible to having their emotional strings plucked by what we have to endure under the leadership of both the DA and ANC in the Western Cape. These are the reasons they sometimes swallow the myths and distortions that the loud conservative machine spews out.

To reach true conservatives is a daunting task which leaves you normally in a state of total demoralization.

“Conservatives” come in all shapes and stripes, sizes and styles. You may even think of yourself as a conservative. You may define conservative as being prudent, frugal, perhaps “All-South African” or “middle-of-the-road.” You may think “conservative” means believing in small government, low taxes, a strong defense and “traditional” values. If so, you are very confused about what a “conservative” really is.

Being prudent, frugal, religious, moderate, middle-of-the-road, and/or “All-South African” is not what makes a political conservative. Not in the least. Liberals can also be all of these things. These are common sense and virtuous ways of living. Liberals also want a small government and low taxes; the smallest and lowest we can have and still maintain a modern, fair and just society.

As for supporting “traditional” values, yes, liberals are up to that too… as long as they are real, universal values and not just snowy old customs or obsolete or unfair institutions.

Why can’t you sell a conservative a new idea, or an unfamiliar move towards a goal? “It is their code that makes the members of the group feel as one,” “They are disgusted, angered, delighted and shamed by the same things. The unanimity of their visceral response is what provides the powerful sense of collective identity. It makes them feel and think as a tribal us, in contrast to those tribes who are not disgusted by what disgusts us, or made angry by what makes us angry, and who feel no shame at what we think of as shameful. A tribe that shares a powerful visceral code that inhibits the natural tendency of the individual to self-assertion will present a united front against its enemies.”

People must insist on the right to say no, to be alone, to stand out from the herd. Creative persons can say all this in their own way and in their own field, by hard, rigorous work. You just never give up, no matter how hard the challenges are, and observe this world with a healthy dose of criticism and don’t just follow the herd like somebody else might do.

We have no organ at all for knowledge, for ”truth”: we ”know” (or believe or imagine) precisely as much as may be useful in the interest of the human herd.

“Quote by Friedrich Nietzsche”

ANC 1133 votes (45,9%)

DA 1332 votes (54%)

Winning margin: 199 votes

This result represents a 14 point increase in ANC support and changes Ward 7 from a DA stronghold to a marginal one. The DA’s 8 point lead is tenuous at best and should be the cause for much alarm in the Marks Building in the days to come.

Clearly the DA’s meretricious scare tactics did not influence Riversdal’s voters as it did Bitou’s voters in Ward 2 in December.

This state of affairs speaks loudly to the willingness and ability of the Riversdal constituents to make objective decisions.

Well done to the ANC!

Woensdag is daar ‘n tussenverkiesing op Riversdal, in wyk 7 van die  munisipaliteit Hessequa. Hessequa beteken “mense van die bome” en dít herinner aan een van die 80′s se voorste plaaslike kommediante, Joe Parker, se ergste grappe. maar dit nou maar daar gelaat.

Terloops, JEF maak vandag geskiedenis met sy éérste Afrikaanse berig! Synde Riversdal meer as 97% Afrikaans is.

Die vakature het ontstaan toe die DA-raadlid, Andrew Stroebel, bedank het  oor wat hy Theuns Botha se aanhoudende inmenging genoem het – iets wat hy nie langer kon gedoog nie.

Theuns en die burgemeester, Emor Nel, en dié se man, is dik pêlle.

Niks verkeerd met vriendskap nie, natuurlik, JEF sê maar net.

Nou ja tóé! Elders kan jy Theuns nie met ‘n John Deere-trekker aan die gang  trek nie, en in Hessequa, sy tuiste, kry jy sy enjin nie gestol nie.

Hoe meer dae, hoe meer dinge.

Voordat Stroebel troebel geraak het, het die DA 7; en die ANC 6 lede; en  Cope en die Independent Civics (IC) elk een lid gehad.

Die ANC staan alleen. Die DA en die IC en Cope het 9-6 regeer.

Wen die ANC Woensdag, word dit 8-7 vir die DA. En die probleem is dan dat  die raad effektief 7-7 verdeel sal wees omdat daar tans ‘n dispuut is oor die IC-lid en slegs 14 van die raadslede raadsvergaderings bywoon – die IC-setel is vir alle praktiese doeleindes vakant, alhoewel die munisipale bestuurder in gebreke bly om die vakature te verklaar.

Maar die DA behóórt te wen.

Wyk 7 het 4 stemdistrikte: Brandrivier – plase agter die berg; Oakdale -plase vóór die berg, insluitende Garcia, Plattekloof, en Vetterivier; Kwanokuthula – informele gebied, die destydse lokasie, en ander nedersettings en huise; en Civic – die tradisioneel wit area, die destydse  dórp.

Die ANC kandidaat, Elsie Windvogel, kom van Garcia af en het glo moeilike  jare oorleef en ken haar mense se behoeftes.

Die DA het Anna-Marie Joubert, ‘n oud-Prethorihaner wat met ‘n welgestelde  plaaslike boer (soos in landbouer) getroud is.

Daar is nie op hierdie stadium ‘n prys vir waar die geld is nie.

Ook nie by wie Theuns van tyd tot tyd ‘n polisiekoffietjie (brannas en kouk) wegsit nie.

Let op: Nié by Elsie nie.

Baie kiesers, so verneem JEF, is ongelukkig met die manier hoe die DA die  munisipaliteit bestuur. Dienslewering in agtergeblewe gebiede is glo maar skraps. Die ANC-lede kla dat geld slegs in DA-gebiede en wyke spandeer word en dat slegs sekere inwoners deur die DA bevoordeel word.

JEF is darem nou al lank genoeg in die land om eensydigheidjies met ‘n dop  vrugtesout te vat.

Maar dat daar ongelukkigheid is met die DA is gewis.

JEF kyk met belang hoe die verkiesing Woensdag verloop.

Pierre Nel

The legal costs in the matter between Pierre Nel and Oudtshoorn Municipality is expected to run into several millions.

The applicant, Pierre Nel, is responsible for the costs and a local newspaper, Die Hoorn, quoted the Executive Mayor, Gordon April, on April 4 that the municipality will start the process to recover the costs as determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal on March 28 when Justices Mpati, Nugent, Pillay, Schoeman, and Mbha dismissed Nel’s appeal with costs including the costs of two counsel.

In reading the June 7, 2011 High Court verdict of Mr Justice Nathan Erasmus, appealed by Nel, the judge’s discontent with the manner in which the matter developed is evident.

I quote verbatim from the verdict:

There is, however, a further disturbing aspect in this matter and this concerns the conduct of the applicant’s attorney of record, Mr Nick Barrow. Mr Barrow entered the fray as the attorney of record only on 4 February 2011. As I have pointed out, long before he became the attorney, and before he was mentioned on any of the papers, he signed a so called confirmatory affidavit. I could not see the relevance thereof at that stage, but until all the other papers were filed, it became very clear, as I have indicated, that he was the driving force behind this issue that resulted in this application.

It is unfortunate that he came on record as an attorney, given that the answering affidavits of the second respondent contains a number of serious allegations regarding his conduct which, if correct, made it improper for him to act as an attorney of record in this matter. There are numerous indications in the record which support this contention and I wish to state at this stage at the time when I asked counsel for further input, I had exactly the same issues as quoted by the first respondent’s counsel in mind and I had flagged in my record and I think it is appropriate that one quotes it here. Firstly, in a handwritten note directed at the second respondent, Mr Barrow is alleged to have stated:

“Jou dom donner, die planne moes en is deur die vorige eienaar ingedien. Gaan kyk in julle deurmekaar kantore.”

In the letter dated 21 September 2007 to the editor of the Oudtshoorn Courant (they use the Dutch word), Mr Barrow is alleged to have stated the following with regard to the second respondent:

“Jou kontrak is nie hernu bloot omdat jy totaal onbevoegd is. ʼn Voëltjie het toe vir my gesê jy is maande agterstallig met paaiemente op jou rekening by die bank en dat hulle die voertuig soek om terug te neem.”

And:

“Twee mense het ook aan my gesê dat jy lief is vir dobbel en casinos toe gaan. Ek sê toe nee dit kan nie waar wees nie, die man dra dan ʼn toga. Jy sal dit seker maar ontken.”

Then a week later, again to the editor of the newspaper, he wrote:

“Maar vader Petersen, wat het jy dan daar gedoen as jy so ʼn gemors daar aangevang het, wat gaan jy hier doen?”

And he persisted with this in the media and in direct correspondence with the second respondent. Then later on 16 April he wrote to the audit committee:

“Die mense is keelvol vir sy bullshit.”

He did not stop there, he goes to the newspapers again and eventually in October 2008 he draws up what he calls a scoreboard of all the points that he scored. Then, of course, we know, as I have summarised earlier on of what happened in the council as a result of payment of legal fees relating to some of these allegations and then Mr Barrow comes on record as the attorney, whereas the serious allegations in the papers are not being dealt with.

It is clear from the founding papers, and more particularly the supporting affidavit of Mr Barrow, that he and the applicant were under one roof with the launching of this application. I am, however, not going to make an order against the attorney himself, but I think it is appropriate in a case like this, that the court shows its displeasure in the way this litigation was conducted and, therefore, the following order is made:

The application is dismissed with costs, which costs shall be on the attorney and client scale and shall include the cost of two counsel and the costs of the appearances on 19 August 2010 and 1 September 2010.

That is the order of the court.

It is a well known fact that the DA was the force behind the case and that Nel simply stepped up to the plate in answer to a request from his political masters.

The fact that the DA Fedex Chair, James Selfe, gave written consent to proceed and an undertaking to fund the case is proof sufficient for this state of affairs.

It is also a well known fact that the DA grew cold over time and that the last DA payment, R50,000 paid on September 10, 2012, after months of haggling and threats by Barrow to withdraw as attorney of record, was made only because Barrow and his supporters brought enormous pressure to bear on Theuns Botha, who ultimately saw to the contribution.

It is inconceivable that his masters and his exploiters will stand by while the Oudtshoorn Municipality ruins Nel.

Or is it?

Nic Barrow

Given the findings of Erasmus J on Barrow’s behaviour, JEF suggests that Nel looks to his attorney of record to foot the costs bill!

Think about it: Nel would (very highly probable) never have launched the legal procedure and certainly would not have appealed – first to the High Court for permission to approach the SCA, and then to the SCA – if he was not pressed by his masters and his exploiters to do so.

Barrow drove the appeal, and most probably only in an effort to have Erasmus J’s unfavourable references to his person and character vacated; and forced the DA’s hand to aid and abbet his personal agenda.

It is only fair that Barrow, who ordered the pizza, should pay for the pizza.

On March 4 one Colin Arendse, a fastidious scribbler to be sure, judged by his turn of vindictive phrase – if the oxymoronic depiction can be tolerated – wrote the president, and copied every man and his dog, and many women too, that “Otta Helene Maree (née Zille) is a pathetic, bare faced liar and for this reason, needs to be removed from her post.”

Arendse’s incandescent anger was sparked by an apparent Zille pronouncement on the bulk of ANC social development spokeswoman Zodwa Magwaza.

Magwasa called Zille’s silence on the much publicised closure of schools an “elephant in the room” and Zille retorted by lampooning the elephant banality with an invitation to Magwaza to manage her mass by cycling.

Arendse remains of the opinion that Zille mocked Magwaza’s lifestyle and weight (no shit! – Ed.), and hence the call to have Zille removed.

Arendse wrote, in reference to the tragic Parkwood case where an elderly pensioner was being held captive for dubious intentions: “I have proof that Zille is not only incompetent but has also peddled lies before – she is a disgrace to every other public servant in our constitutional democracy.”

Whatever one may make of such a full frontal attack, the irony of reporting it to someone so completely lacking in credibility as Jacob Zuma can hardly be lost on anyone with more than a single brain cell.

Yet Otta Helene Maree (née Zille) missed all possible inferences of importance and struck Arendse with a writ from the esteemed law firm Fairbridge Ardene & Lawton Incorporated (Fairbridges to paying clients and sued adversaries) on a letterhead warping under the names of 19 directors, 2 senior consultants, 6 consultants, 2 senior associates, 9 associates, and a practice manager, all cramped on a page headed by a designer logo leaving space only for a reference and the obligatory “dear so-and-so” before the reader is transferred to page two of legal speak such as…

“The… statements are wrongful and defamatory… insofar as they were directly and by innuendo calculated to mean that our client is a person of disreputable moral values, and guilty of conduct unbecoming to acceptable norms of personal behaviour… Aspersions are cast (‘aspersions are cast’, nogal! – Ed.) on our client’s competence, ethics, morality and integrity… accused our client of having no regard for the rule of law…”

Oy, vey is mir!

Despite Helen Zille’s prior pronouncements on freedom of speech…

“We may feel repelled by hurtful speech. But it must nevertheless be protected by the freedom of speech clauses in the Constitution. Otherwise political correctness soon determines what is ‘hurtful’. And then we are on the slippery slope to the point where a ruling party determines what we may or may not say. Julius Malema put it in so many words: ‘We meant this law to be used against those being hurtful to us. Now it is being used against us! Exactly.’ “

Despite Helen Zille’s prior pronouncements on freedom of speech, the Fairbridges missive is much like loosing that fat kid with the lousy haircut from North Korea upon a single mosquito.

What is it with the DA and criticism?

First O!O was too much of a threat to feed information to.

Then JEF was singled out by self-styled strongman Theuns Botha as not worthy of DA answers.

Now an individual, irked by a reference he personally found objectionable, is threatened with legal action.

The heat in the kitchen – in the Marks Building; in Leeuwenhof, is on the up it seems!

1.  Theuns Botha & Donald Grant linked to High Treason, Sedition and Public Violence
2. DA Wastes even More Money on Frivolous Legal Battles and Loses (Again)!
3. 8th Mayoral Newsletter
4. The Mayor’s 8th and a Half Newsletter – Part 2
5. Letter from Mayor Memory Booysen
6. Bitou Municipality Guilty of Cadre Deployment? You Decide
7. Brian Molefe versus Thys Giliomee (Round 2)
8. Riots in Plett
9. We Found the Mayor’s Car!
10. Dear Helen Zille…Do You Trust These People?