, In the early 1990s when South Africa was contemplating
transition to democracy, Wiechers advanced the case for the
establishment of a constitutional court. He argued that this court
would be able to protect and enforce human rights and liberties
[and] to provide expert knowledge and the political as well as
socio-economic understanding which is needed to judge intricate
constitutional processes and issues.1 This view echoes the
contemporary view that the Constitution2 that was designed to
revolutionise the South African state reflects the needs and
interests of all South Africans.3 In its articulation of a unique form
of the separation of powers doctrine4 and in pursuit of ensuring a
modern, robust constitutional democracy, the judiciary has viewed
its role as complementary to (as opposed to distinct from) the
legislative and executive branches of the state. As Corder remarks,
in its first 15 years, the Constitutional Court’s judgments were
‘careful, wide, fair and at time courageous commitment to
constitutional principle and practice’.5 So determined is the
judiciary to uphold constitutional principle and practice that it has
recently admonished the executive, with a court declaring that a
particular government department was ‘grossly non-compliant’
and its representatives had shown up late for the court hearing.6
Some important developments in South African constitutional law
are set out below. First, for the first time in South Africa’s history,
two judges and the Public Protector were impeached. South Africa
also has a multi-party government for the first time since the
advent of democracy thirty years ago. _________________ 1
Marinus Wiechers ‘A constitutional court for South Africa’ in DJ
van Vuuren et al South Africa in the Nineties (1991) HSRC
Publisher 290. 2 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
transition to democracy, Wiechers advanced the case for the
establishment of a constitutional court. He argued that this court
would be able to protect and enforce human rights and liberties
[and] to provide expert knowledge and the political as well as
socio-economic understanding which is needed to judge intricate
constitutional processes and issues.1 This view echoes the
contemporary view that the Constitution2 that was designed to
revolutionise the South African state reflects the needs and
interests of all South Africans.3 In its articulation of a unique form
of the separation of powers doctrine4 and in pursuit of ensuring a
modern, robust constitutional democracy, the judiciary has viewed
its role as complementary to (as opposed to distinct from) the
legislative and executive branches of the state. As Corder remarks,
in its first 15 years, the Constitutional Court’s judgments were
‘careful, wide, fair and at time courageous commitment to
constitutional principle and practice’.5 So determined is the
judiciary to uphold constitutional principle and practice that it has
recently admonished the executive, with a court declaring that a
particular government department was ‘grossly non-compliant’
and its representatives had shown up late for the court hearing.6
Some important developments in South African constitutional law
are set out below. First, for the first time in South Africa’s history,
two judges and the Public Protector were impeached. South Africa
also has a multi-party government for the first time since the
advent of democracy thirty years ago. _________________ 1
Marinus Wiechers ‘A constitutional court for South Africa’ in DJ
van Vuuren et al South Africa in the Nineties (1991) HSRC
Publisher 290. 2 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
