Waluś can’t be denied parole simply because of who he killed

I cannot believe the opinion written by Tom Mhlanga on November 23 2022. How is Mhlanga expecting the Constitutional Court to treat the Waluś/Hani murder case differently?

Do you Mr Mhlanga know what you are actually suggesting here is that the law be applied differently for South Africans?

That is utterly wrong.

SA is a constitutional democracy and there are no arguments there, this simply means that the constitution is the supreme law of the country.

The parole judgment was legal in law and the suggestion of a referendum is absurd to say the least. Waluś cannot be denied parole simply because of who he killed; he’s met all the legal requirements for parole, simple as that.

We must also refrain from suggesting that he was released by chief justice Raymond Zondo, that is wrong and deliberately malicious. A lot of people, even Limpho Hani’s utterances about a white man, are up in arms simply because Waluś is white, let’s just be honest.

Tony Yengeni and Schabir Shaik got parole and there was not as much uproar as now. Yes, the two didn’t kill anyone but their paroles were legitimised by the law, the SA law that is supposed to be applied equally for all.

Lest we forget, the introduction of the constitution and the abolishment of the death penalty was the great idea of both the ANC and SACP with their alliances.

Had we still had the death penalty, Waluś would have been dead long ago and we wouldn’t be having this discussion 29 years later.

Body text ragged right