Mail & Guardian Reporters
In the week the Constitutional Court made legal precedent by passing judgment on two constitutions, it also set a grammatical precedent which had some of the press temporarily baffled.
Announcing its decision on the certification of the KwaZulu-Natal Constitution to the public gallery, the court appeared to pioneer the concept of a triple negative: “We are unable to, and therefore decline to certify that the text is not inconsistent with the interim Constitution and the constitutional principles.”
This comment caused at least one leading European newspaper and at least one wire agency to report to head office that the Constitution — against all expectations — had been certified. BBC radio also put out a broadcast that the Kwazulu-Natal Constitution had got the go-ahead.
The summary of the court’s written judgment contained a much clearer story, told with the eloquence and precision that characterise the court’s judgments. In fact, the judges were unusually hard-hitting, describing the provincial document as “fatally flawed”, and saying some of its provisions were an attempt to “usurp the powers of the national government”.