It Is Red, It Must Be a Communist! - On Free Education

In March 2012 the Minister of Higher Education, Dr Blade Nzimande, who in his spare time masquerade as a communist, set up a working group to “investigate, and advise on, the feasibility of making university education fee-free for the poor in South Africa.”

In October of the same year, the Working Group presented him with the report which in a nutshell said that it is possible to provide free education to poor student within the current education framework. The report went on to outline where and how the resources can be obtained and used effectively in order to achieve such an outcome.

Suffice to say that the report was kept a secret until one member of the Working Group let the cat out of the bag to the effect that free education to the poor in this country is feasible and there is a report that the whiskey communist forgot all about once they had submitted. And Alas! Some capitalist and counter revolutionary within his office leaked the report to the media.

The Minister in carrying out his revolutionary duties in setting up the Working Group, tasked it with the following terms of reference:

•  determine the actual cost of introducing fee-free university education for poor people in South Africa; in other words, what would it cost South Africa to offer fee-free university education to cover people classified as poor;

•  suggest a working definition of poor people in South Africa, if necessary suggesting different categories and how all can be provided fee-free university education; and consideration should be given to the ‘missing middle’, where some families do not earn enough to be considered for loans by financial institutions but are not classified as poor, thus cannot access services directed at those classified as poor;

•  consider existing policy provision and broadly consult documentation of other task teams/working groups in the Department which deal or dealt with related fields;

•  examine various models and options of providing fee-free higher education for poor people used elsewhere in the world and make recommendations to the Minister;

•  contemplate all possible implications and consequences of providing fee-free university education for the poor.

In order to fully comprehend and to move from a common understanding the Working Group interpreted the following terms as follows:

•   'University education' in this specific context is understood to refer to undergraduate university education, including degrees (both 3- and 4-year), diplomas and certificates. Postgraduate education is therefore excluded.

•   'Fees' to be considered 'free' are taken to include not only tuition fees but the full cost of study necessary for success at university, including: registration and tuition fees; meals and accommodation; books; and travel.

•   'The poor' are defined, minimally, as those households earning less than the lowest SARS tax bracket (or R54 200 per annum, in 2010 prices). Other categories of the poor are also discussed and considered in this report.

·    In terms of these working definitions, therefore, this report focuses on the feasibility of providing free full-cost-of-study undergraduate university education for children from households not paying any income tax.

As part of executing their task the Working Group looked at a myriad of documentation including Public Policy on education since the ushering of the new dispensation in 1994, the 1997 White Paper on Education, the NSFAS roles and responsibilities with particular emphasis on the 2010 NSFAS Ministerial Review.

The Working Group also looked at the 2007 resolution of the 52^nd National Conference of the ANC on education which stated that government must “progressively introduce free higher education for the poor until undergraduate level”. The ANC, at its Lekgotla in July, 2011, further resolved that “extending the provision of free education to cover students in other years of study must be examined fully”, and “covering the full cost of study for poor student in scarce skills areas, in all the years of study must be effected, but guarding against the downgrading of social sciences programmes provision”.  

Having had regard to all these and other documents, the Working Group came up with the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1:

Free full cost of study undergraduate university education for the poor in South Africa

should be introduced using the current NSFAS structure and procedures as a basis, but refining these over time, and simultaneously ensuring that corporate governance, fund management procedures and loan recovery practices at NSFAS are completely overhauled and rendered above reproach.

Recommendation 2:

Funding for free university education for the poor should be derived at least in part from a proportion of the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) funds set aside by both the private and the public sectors for skills development, and earmarked to provide for sustainable NSFAS-administered income-contingent loans to poor students in identified scarce-skills sectors.

Recommendation 3:

Such SETA funds which are already being used for bursaries, short course skills programmes and internships for poor students, along with portions of corporate social responsibility funds, should be centralised and properly coordinated under a single, NSFAS umbrella.

Recommendation 4:

New sources of funding, not discounting the national budget, large financial institutions and international donors, must be found so as to render free university education for the poor both affordable and effective.

Recommendation 5:

Those initially and primarily eligible for free university education, on the basis of

NSFAS income-contingent loans, should be learners holding National Senior

Certificates who are admitted into a university and come from households earning less than the lowest SARS tax bracket, meaning that they will be required to make no household contribution.

Recommendation 6:

In addition, learners holding National Senior Certificates who are admitted into a university and come from households earning between R54 200 and

R271 000 (in 2010 prices) should be eligible for free university education in a similar manner, but should be required to make some household contribution.

Recommendation 7:

As and when additional funding can be sourced or provided, additional categories of needy children may be progressively included.

Recommendation 8:

Eligibility should be determined on the basis of duly refined and properly administered NSFAS means tests.

Recommendation 9:

The policy dialogue model as utilised in this report should be considered as the starting point for developing a fully-fledged costing model both for free university education for the poor and, ultimately, for a comprehensive student financial aid and academic support system which takes into account adequate housing, proper nutrition, cultural inclusion, and enhanced awareness through career and vocational guidance at school level.

Recommendation 10:

In order to ensure that increased financial access on the part of the poor is converted into academic success at university, additional funds shall have to be made available to cover costs related to providing:

·         improved and better funded academic support, tutorial support and residential or living-learning support mechanisms;

·         affordable technological solutions (such as in-class audio and visual feeds, on-line learning or distance education); and

·         sufficient additional numbers of academic and administrative staff to ensure adequate class sizes at universities and improved quality of contact time between staff and students.

Recommendation 11:

Funding should be premised on the principle both that fees must be realistic, and that the cost of university study must be proportionate to a student's ability to pay.

Students must contribute where they can (even if minimally), and where possible should be afforded the option to do so either financially, on the basis of future income, and/or through community or public service (which should target areas of scarce skills).

Recommendation 12:

Current levels of government funding of public higher education institutions must be maintained or even increased, so as to preserve the basis on which institutions will be required to redouble their efforts to translate financial access into academic success.

In Conclusion

These are practical recommendations that should have been progressively implemented at the beginning of 2013. For the Minister to sit on the report and in 2015 proclaim that they do not know where they will get the money from is scandalous to say the least and laughable at best.

What is required here is for our capitalist communist Minister to offer free education within his capitalist outlook.

Free education is possible!! Free education is desirable!!

 

Ship Ahoy - When the message is not in the music.

The O'jays' Ship Ahoy is one of the best and socially conscious albums in their discography. The genius behind this album are composers and producers, Kenneth Gamble and Leon Huff. They have written a lot of gems for groups like Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes, Billy Paul of "Me and Mrs Jones" fame, Aretha Franklin and the others but it is through the O'Jays that they found their artistic expression. It is through the O'Jays that the sound of Philadelphia came to be celebrated.

Ship Ahoy was released in 1973 as a concept album with the main theme being slavery and its aftereffects on the American society. Gamble and Huff were probably influenced by the hugely successful Marvin Gaye's "What's Going on", a concept album about hatred, suffering, injustice and the Vietnam war. It is said that the album was the first R&B concept album and sold more than 2 million copies.

Ship Ahoy is also a concept album with its main theme being slavery with a particular emphasis on the Atlantic slave trade. The album is also critical about the effects of capitalism on society as can be heard on their hit song "For the Love of Money". Their other hit song "The air I breath" laments the commodification social relations and "Don't call me brother" is about two timing people and backstabbers who betray socially conscious brothers in their mission for social justice.

After Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On", "Ship Ahoy" is arguably one of the most important albums about social justice to come out of the US. However unlike Marvin Gaye, the songs were laid on the silver platter for them by the founders, composers and producers at Philadelphia International Records. Marvin Gaye had to fight Barry Gordy's Motown Records for the right to have his music recorded. Marvin Gaye's album became a huge success because he could clearly articulate the concept behind his music.

With the O'Jays, that articulation was absent as they considered themselves firstly R&B singers and entertainers and as a result the message behind the music was lost. It is ironic that "For the love of Money" has been used as a theme song for Donald Trump's TV programme "The Apprentice". This shows how watered down the message in their music has been.

The central theme around this immensely gifted singers' music is a lack of grasp of the consciousness of their music. There are songs like "The Year 2000", "Give people what they want", "Put your Hands together" and the lesser known "Message in the music", highly conscious songs that didn't make it past people's consciousness. One would have expected such songs to become standards and rallying cries for the civil rights movements and the oppressed of  the world.

Imagine if a Nina Simone or Marvin Gaye were given these songs, they would have been at the heart of the civil rights movement struggle. Brilliant as the O'Jays are, they have done a disservice to the brilliance and radicalism of Leon Huff and Kenneth Gamble. Imagine how immortal they would have been had they followed up such revolutionary gems with a bit of radicalism and consciousness on their part.

Ship Ahoy, the album, is such a haunting and painful album that chronicles slavery and its aftereffects in America. The song itself is hauntingly beautiful, with the crack of the whip in the background and the sound of the ocean articulating the poignancy in the song.

Ship Ahoy is one of the most beautifully crafted albums that ranks up there with Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On" and Nina Simone's radical songs. It is a pity that Eddie Levert, Walter Williams and William Powell failed to inject the radicalism and consciousness that was required to bring to the fore the message in the music. It is a pity that most of these beautiful gems are considered pop songs and R&B standards that are nice to dance to. 

It is also remarkable that the composers of the music did not make a concerted effort to articulate the message behind their lyrics. But then again it is said that the painter is not meant to interpret his work. Pity!

Dear John - On the Book of Ecclesiastes

I have read with interest the whole book of Ecclesiastes. I must say I find it odd that this book has been included in the bible, perhaps I need to read the whole bible in order to understand the context under which it has been included. I am going to approach this from a philosophical point of view because the book raises a fundamental question of existence, what is life, why are we here on earth. I must say I find the views of the writer, Qoheleth, or The teacher, as he is referred to in the bible, towards this age old question very interesting.

Philosophy is the study of nature and the meaning of the universe and human life. In my view the book tries to ponder the meaning of life and offers his views on what the meaning of life is. I must say from the beginning that I am neither a philosopher nor a theologian and my views here are premised on the limited understanding I have of the two disciplines.

The Teacher starts his debate by categorically stating that "Everything is meaningless, completely meaningless" and asserts that "god has dealt a tragic existence to the human race" and trying to understand life is like "chasing the wind" (Ch 1: 2-14). He goes on to talk about the futility of everything on the following chapters and offers advise on how to counter this futility. I find his advice very contradictory and very confused in most instances and also out of tune with what the bible was written for. The central message in the bible is that we are all passerby's in this earth and the kingdom of god awaits us in heaven. The central message of the teacher can be found in Chapter 9: 5-10 and this is repeated in other verses throughout the book. The verse says that " The living at least know they will die, but the dead know nothing. They have no further reward, nor are they remembered. Whatever they did in their lifetime-loving, hating, envying-is all gone......so go ahead. Eat your food with joy, and drink your wine with a happy heart, for God approves of this! Wear fine clothes, with a splash of cologne!.....whatever you do, do well. For when you go to the grave there will be no work or planning or knowledge of wisdom" (see also chapter 5: 8-20).

The basic message from these chapters is work hard and party hard for when you die you are nothing. Enjoy your time on earth because when you die, it's all over. I am tempted to think that the teacher here was encouraging capitalism: accumulate as much as you can and enjoy it to the fullest for any other thing you try to do is an exercise in futility. In your accumulation and your partying hard, remember to honour god because he is the provider: This seems to be the central message for me in this book, and this is how people live their lives these days

The other central theme in this book is wisdom, in order to make it in life you need to be wise but he goes on to caution that too much of wisdom is not a good thing. At Ch 7: 16 he warns "so don't be too good or too wise! Why destroy yourself". He was determined to be wise but it didn't work because "Wisdom is always distant and difficult" He goes on to assert that in being wise you also need to be rich because "...even though wisdom is better than strength, those who are wise will be despised if they are poor. What they say will not be appreciated for long." (Ch 9:13). So in my view this book is at odds with the teachings of the bible because it says that you must make your own paradise on earth and enjoy it while you leave because any other thing is like chasing the wind. (maybe this is the central theme in the bible, I don't know!)

Having said that what the Teacher is asking here is an existential question. Soren Kierkegaard, a philosopher of the early 19th century, is regarded as the father of existentialism. This is a brand of philosophy that seeks to question the meaning of life by focusing on the condition of human existence. Perhaps the Teacher, Qoheleth, should be regarded as the father of existentialism, though his views are, in my opinion, very contradictory and very simplistic at times.

I must say that the Teacher asks a very difficult question on the beginning: what is the purpose of life. He goes on to answer that this is a meaningless exercise and the best a person can do is to work hard and enjoy the fruits of your toil fully but I find the closing paragraph of the book at odds with all what has been said in the preceding chapters, almost as an afterthought : "Here now is my final conclusion: Fear God and obey his commands, for this is everyone's duty."

History is not Progressive

Reading up on the history of the Haitian revolution (1791-1804), I was amazed by the parallels that one can draw with the liberation of the African countries in the 20th century and South Africa in particular. It is interesting when drawing parallels to notice that the struggles that Haiti went through after its liberation are the struggles that South Africa is facing currently, the problems of rampant poverty, elitism, institutionalized corruption, infighting and political assassinations.

Haiti’s independence came to be referred as a defining moment for all struggles against colonialism and a fight for independence. An independent government was established but it failed to undertake a fundamental transformation that ensured the establishment of an egalitarian society. Instead the new government did not change the system that was used to oppress the population but instead adopted it to serve the elite that had been developed by the French in order to satisfy the needs of the motherland. This resulted in the Haitian population’s continued oppression under patterns established under French colonial rule. A system of minority rule over the illiterate poor entrenched by using violence and threats.

Travel forward in history to South Africa in 1994. The new democratic government in South Africa did exactly what led to the failure of the Haitian revolution, they did not change the system that led to the subjugation of Black people but instead sought to create a situation which accommodated the needs of a new Black elite and create conditions that would allow for the rise of this new elite. Where we used to have the Anglo Americans, we now have the Mvelaphandas and the Rainbow Minerals who continue to extract cheap labour from the poor at huge profits. Opening the system up for the new elite has tended to create new pockets of poverty. As a result the gap between the rich and the poor has tended to widen quite a bit resulting in a well known fact that South Africa has replaced Brazil as the most unequal society in the world.

We know that since its independence Haiti has been rocked by coups and counter coups as a result of comrades in arms turning against each other and failure of the elected governments to serve their constituencies. Failures that are as a result of keeping the oppressive system intact for the benefit of the new, democratic elites. One can argue that the new government has perfected what apartheid sought out to do, create wealth for a minority at the expense of the poor, only now the minority is no longer exclusively white or Afrikaner. One can understand condescending attitudes pervasive amongst white people towards the democratic government, it has excelled at mimicking apartheid, while at the same time condemning it as evil and its beneficiaries as even more evil! Double standards!

We are seeing a rise in political assassinations in pursuit of access to state resources, the system allows for systemized corruption, infighting within the ruling party has become the order of the day and some leaders within the ruling party have grudgingly come to acknowledge this. The removal of Thabo Mbeki was not based on any ideological differences, the break away of COPE was also not based on any ideological differences, it instead has the hallmarks of a scramble for access to state resources.

I am no student of history and though historians might say that mine is a simplistic analysis, the parallels between Haiti towards the end of the 18th century and South Africa in the 21st century are striking. This forces one to indeed conclude that history is not a good teacher at all.

They Needed Something to Placate the Masses!!

The new mantra of the new administration has been crime fighting and how the police are constrained in fighting crime. Elsewhere I have written how this is just a ruse to placate the masses because they need to be seen to be doing something different from the much loathed and never supported Mbeki administration.

Below is excerpt from Section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977 on the use of force by the police. This section is very clear on when and how the police may use force and or deadly force. Pay particular attention to section 49(2)(c) which clearly states how and when the police may use deadly force.

49. Use of force in effecting arrest.—(1) For the purposes of this section—

(a) “arrestor” means any person authorised under this Act to arrest or to assist in
arresting a suspect; and

(b) “suspect” means any person in respect of whom an arrestor has or had a reasonable
suspicion that such person is committing or has committed an offence.

(2) If any arrestor attempts to arrest a suspect and the suspect resists the attempt, or flees, or resists the attempt and flees, when it is clear that an attempt to arrest him or her is being made, and the suspect cannot be arrested without the use of force, the arrestor may, in order to effect the arrest, use such force as may be reasonably necessary and proportional in the circumstances to overcome the resistance or to prevent the suspect from fleeing: Provided that the arrestor is justified in terms of this section in using deadly force that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm to a suspect, only if he or she believes on reasonable grounds—

(a) that the force is immediately necessary for the purposes of protecting the arrestor, any person lawfully assisting the arrestor or any other person from imminent or future death or grievous bodily harm;

(b) that there is a substantial risk that the suspect will cause imminent or future death or grievous bodily harm if the arrest is delayed; or

(c) that the offence for which the arrest is sought is in progress and is of a forcible and serious nature and involves the use of life threatening violence or a strong likelihood that it will cause grievous bodily harm.

What S49(2)(c) says in simple language is that if the police in attempting to effect an arrest are confronted with deadly force from the alleged perpetrators then it is well within their rights to use deadly force. What part of this section constrains the police from effectively doing their job, I don’t understand.

The South African public is being taken for a ride and they have been gullible enough to believe that the law as it currently stands is a constraint for the police in doing their job. In the meantime innocent people are being killed in the name of taking a fight to the criminals. We have already seen media reports of people who have been shot at and mortally wounded or killed for not stopping on time when stopped by the police.

Unfortunately a lot of the innocent people who are being murdered by the state belongs to the black majority and we know for a fact that a black life is easily expendable. Wait until a member of the lighter race is killed in this name of fighting crime, then we will see “respect for human rights” in action and an outcry about police brutality.

In the meantime this populist administration has dismally/conveniently failed to identify the root cause of crime in this country. Shooting and maiming innocent people will not drive away crime. Shouting at the rooftops that you will deal with crime once and for all while criminal bosses cut deals with the state not to be prosecuted is showing people the middle finger. To state that the state is serious about fighting crime when the state has actively encouraged the cutting of these deals with hardcore criminals really smacks of shameless opportunism, which has unfortunately become a trend in South Africa.

Celebrating mediocrity

I love my sport and I have convinced myself that had it not been because of apartheid I would have been the best sportsman there was ever going to be in South Africa. So because this self delusion never became a reality the closest I can be is a coach potato and an armchair coach. Nothing satisfies my ego than watching Kaizer (or is it Zimbabwe) Chiefs getting beaten every weekend. That is not what I want to talk about anyway....

This weekend Bafana Bafana will be playing Madagascar, I hear. We keep on being bombarded by analysts and journalists about how Bafana has lost six straight games and how it is time for the coach, Joel Santana to be sacked. A few weeks ago during the confederations cup he was celebrated by the self same analysts, journalists and fans for being the best thing that happened to South Africa. Just shows you how fickle and spineless these professional commentators can be. But then they will tell you that they are expressing what ordinary citizens want....how they easily get blown by a gentle breeze!!. I must say I am happy that for once SAFA have learned their lesson and have expressed confidence in the coach.

South Africans are so used to celebrating mediocrity such that they cannot see a good thing in front of their eyes. In my opinion Santana has taken one of the most mediocre teams in Africa and the world and turned them into something that can punch above their weight. Bafana might have lost six straight games but they were neither outclassed nor disgraced in any way, and you have to look at the quality of the opposition they were facing...Spain, Brazil, Italy, Germany...just to name a few. South Africa has mediocre players who often grace benches in unknown teams that they are playing for overseas. Out of all the overseas contingent of SA stars only one player, Steven Pienaar, has consistently made the starting line up at his team, the rest are part players or never get an opportunity to run onto the field. And we call them our international stars!!

Here at home top teams like Mamelodi Sundowns, Zimbabwe (sorry Kaizer) Chiefs and Orlando Pirates get beaten regularly by lowly teams in the African competitions. They get beaten by a bunch of part timers from part time leagues around Africa but we keep deluding ourselves that we are the best. Even most of the African players who ply their trade here never make it into their national teams squad but they are regarded as indespensible by the teams they play for here. Sundowns, Chiefs and Pirates are the richest teams in the league but except for Pirates they are playing pathetic football. The only thing that Pirates can celebrate is consistently coming up second on the log over the past 10 years or so, the other two are so pathetic you never know which team will turn up on match day.

Now if you think that Bafana Bafana can be world beaters looking at the mediocrity of our league and the lack of success of our biggest stars on the international scene then you need your head examined or you don't know anything about football. But wait a minute, Bafana Bafana are well on the road to be world beaters thanks to the one Brazilian, Joel Santana. Having regard to all I have said above I always get impressed by the professionalism and the tactical awareness shown by Bafana Bafana everytime they step onto the field....Yes Santana has taken our mediocre players and is slowly moulding them into world beaters. Sure we will lose games but the dream is there and with every game it is becoming within reach. For the first time Bafana can actually string together about 15 passes without losing the ball and all the time moving forward, Bafana can defend as a unit and most of the goals they conceded have come from set pieces. Here in the local league teams struggle to string together 5 passes and a striker has to miss 10 clear cut chances before he can score goal and this can be seen at national level.

Santana has shown us that there is so much talent in South Africa but what is lacking is the mentality to go with it. With every game of Bafana I can see that self belief, that perseverance and that winning mentality developing. Most of our players fail on the international stage not because of lack of talent but because of lack of mental toughness and the lack of ability to overcome all the obstacle. In the meantime we can throw all the money into the game but if we do not develop that winning mentality, if we don't develop that self belief then we might as well continue the trend of appointing new coaches on the eve of big international tournaments.

But then the 1994 "miracle" made us belief that we can be world beaters without necessarily applying ourselves. We have become so used to celebrating mediocrity but it shall not be done on my name!

What and Who is a Criminal?

There is this buzz these days amongst the country’s top echelon about the need to effectively deal with crime and to render South Africa safe for its citizens. There is talk doing rounds that police must shoot to kill and talk of amending legislation in order to make this possible is gathering momentum. Talk that criminals are enjoying more rights is also rife and the president has been the main driver of this view. This leads one to ask what and who is a criminal and what rights are are being referred to. The police have always shot at criminals in order to defend their life and limb, why the sudden need to increase their powers. In attempting to tackle crime isn’t this talk of “shoot to kill” barking up the wrong tree?

A person is presumed innocent until the state proves his criminality beyond reasonable doubt and a court of law declares him a criminal. Otherwise before that we cannot label people criminals even if they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Our president, Jacob Zuma was accused of corruption and other crimes and he and his supporters rightly found it offensive to presume him a criminal before he had his day in court. He used all the rights provided for in the constitution and other legislation to ensure that his right to be presumed innocent and to a fair trial was protected. What right does he then have say that people that are criminally accused are enjoying more rights when he was, rightly, a beneficiary of that protection. When he says that criminals enjoy more rights who is he referring to because all criminals are serving all sorts of sentences that are meted out by the courts. Before a court of law declares somebody a criminal, the president, the Minister of Police or the Commissioner of Police, have no right to call anybody a criminal. That is the law and they should know!

In an effort to be seen to be doing something about crime our government is resorting to populist tactics which will not serve them good in the long run. A lot of crime that is happening does not need any use of force in order to prevent it nor does it need police to brandish their might in order to indicate who is in charge. In order to tackle crime in South Africa what is needed is the capacity and political will to deal with criminality at all spheres of society. So called criminals are walking the streets because they are able to buy dockets from the police or because it is easy for them to get bail because somebody did not do his job properly and place sufficient evidence before the court to prove that such a person is a flight risk. They are walking the streets because the majority of the police are functionally illiterate and cannot take proper statements that will stand the rigor of close scrutiny in a court of law. They are walking the street with impunity because the police force is overwhelmed by the amount of work that they have to do and there is serious lack of capacity.

As an example it is a well known fact that the Department of Home Affairs is rotten to the core and one just needs a few hundred rands to acquire a South African passport or ID. Over the years the Auditor General has exposed the corruption that is rampant within the government departments and municipalities in the awarding of tenders and billions of rands meant for service delivery have been lost. Senior Civil servants moonlighting as service providers have not been brought to book despite overwhelming evidence and many politicians are implicated in one scandal or another but nothing is done about it.

Guns that are used in armed robberies and hijackings have most of the time been stolen from the police or are AK-47 that were used in the liberation struggle by people who most often have skipped bail or are on some wanted list of the police. Surely there must be something fundamentally wrong when the state of affairs is like this and resorting to shoot to kill policies is not going to solve the problem.

The Commissioner of Police is implicated in a case of obstruction of justice because he allegedly interfered with the work of the police in a case where his friend is accused of drunken driving and culpable homicide where the friend skipped a red robot and collided with another motor vehicle, killing its occupants. How is the law going to bite this Commissioner and his friend? Isn’t it the duty of the state to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Commissioner obstructed the implementation of justice and that his friend was drunk beyond the legal limit and as a result caused an accident where people lost their lives.

Mind you the constitution is the supreme law of this country and all this posturing by politicians will amount to nothing if the courts pronounce that all this machoness they are showing is unconstitutional. The Constitution is god and if god says so, it cannot be.