dwp eNewsletter

Vol 3 : Ed 4 - September 2009

To return to the main page, click here.

| nowheresville |

| what not to do, part 2 |

Like the first part, this instalment addresses what not to do in our courts. This case, like last months, illustrates how outrageous individuals can be. In S v Moila the courts held Mr Moila in contempt of court on 10 different counts of scandalising the courts. The facts were as follows.

A bitter dispute had ensued between Mr Moila and the University of the North which resulted in his ejectment from the premises. He sought an order to address the unlawful ejectment, whereupon the university instituted its own counter application to have Mr M ejected. The courts found in favour of the University. Mr M was unhappy with the outcome - and from here the trouble ensues.

Three days after the judgement Mr M issued a ‘press statement’ in which he accuses the judge of racism, bias and dishonesty. But Mr M didn’t stop there, the following appeared on his ‘To do list’

He addressed a letter to a number of public officers (including the judicial Services Commission) in which he continued to accuse the judge of racism, incompetence, intimidation and collusion with the opposing parties and called for his removal as judge

Filed a notice of Recusal, in anticipation for the appeal he was going to lodge, where he repeated the accusations against the judge

Addressed a letter to the Minister of Justice accusing the judge of the same list of evils

Addressed a ‘trilogy’ of documents to the Human Rights Commission – where the judge is again accused of racism and conducting himself in a manner ‘calculated to defeat the Constitution’

He then filed his leave to appeal, in which he accused the judge of racism, secret collusion with the opposition, bias, incompetence, intimidation of the Mr M’s legal representatives, insulting behaviour, dishonesty, deviousness and defeating the ends of justice.

In a separate application, Mr M attacks his other archrivals, the University. The default judgement was dismissed and once again Mr M flys into a rage and levels complaints to the Judge President, stating that the ‘racism in this division has been given a judicial cloak.’

The court dealt with each of the 10 counts individually, and unanimously held that he was guilty on all charges.

To read part 1 of the series "What not to do", click here.