10140005_1 13/05/2016
IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case no: CCT 255/15
ROBERT McBRIDE Applicant
and
MINISTER OF POLICE First Respondent
MINISTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION
Second Respondent
HELEN SUZMAN FOUNDATION Amicus curiae
HSF'S PRACTICE NOTE
1. NATURE OF THIS APPLICATION
1.1 This is an application in terms of Rule 16(4) for the confirmation of the orders of constitutional invalidity and ancillary order made by the High Court (Gauteng Division, Pretoria) under case no GP 06588/2015;
2
1.2 The matter involves the constitutional validity sections 6(3)(a) and 6(6) of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate Act, 2011 ("IPID Act"); sections 17(1) and 17(2) of the Public Service Act, 1994; and regulation 13 of the Regulations for the Operation of IPID (GNR98 of GG35018, 10 February 2012).
2. ISSUES TO BE ARGUED
2.1 Effect of the relief sought by the first respondent.
2.2 Effect of the relief sought on actual and perceived independence.
3. PORTIONS OF THE RECORD NECESSARY FOR DETERMINATION OF THE MATTER
3.1 The whole of the record
4. ESTIMATED DURATION OF ORAL ARGUMENT
4.1 30 minutes
5. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
5.1 An "effective remedy", that is, one that upholds and enhances – vindicates – the values underlying and the rights entrenched in the Constitution.
3
5.2 The default position in constitutional law is that unconstitutional conduct which is the subject of challenge must be declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution and must be set aside in its entirety, from inception.
5.3 Perceived independence in the eyes of the public, the police and members within the institution is essential for IPID’s effective and efficient functioning.
6. LIST OF AUTHORITIES UPON WHICH PARTICULAR RELIANCE WILL BE PLACED
6.1 Glenister v President of the Republic of South Africa 2011 (3) SA 347 (CC)
6.2 Helen Suzman Foundation v President of the Republic of South Africa 2015 (2) SA 1 (CC)
Carol Steinberg Chambers, Sandton 13 May 2016
