Question $6$

$(15$ Marks$)$

Read the following fictitious scenario and answer the question that follows:

On $25$ June $2023,$ the chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Service, Mr Jackson, announced that it would summon Judge Dali to appear before it to answer questions relating to a judgment in a rape case delivered by him. This was after Judge Dali, a judge of the Northern Cape High Court, had sentenced a rapist to seven years imprisonment. The judgment caused a public outcry; the public felt the sentence was too light. Judge Dali was accused of ignoring the minimum sentences prescribed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act $105$ of $1997.$ He was also reported to have stated that it was a mitigating factor that the accused had raped his daughter and that there was little danger that the crime would be repeated. Feminists and anti$-$rape groups were appalled by the judgment because of the high crime statistics of rape of women and children in South Africa. In a public statement, Mr$.$ Jackson was very unhappy with the judgment. He stated: "The Courts have a lot of power, although its members are not democratically elected, and the decision of a few unelected judges should not carry more weight than the majority's choices. Judges should be held accountable."

You are a Chief Parliamentary advisor at Parliament. Mr Jackson approaches you for legal advice.

Required:

$6\mathrm{.}1$ In light of the above, explain to Mr Jackson how Parliament can effectively exercise checks and balances over the judiciary in terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, $1996.$

$(5$ marks$)$

$6\mathrm{.}2.$ Write a brief note in which you explain in your own words what the phrase "counter$-$majoritarian concern" means. In your answer, you must indicate whether the "counter$-$majoritarian" concern or argument is observed in the scenario above.

$(7$ marks$)$