Politics and Constitutional Adjudication: A response to Prof F Venter

In order to respond appropriately to Prof Venter’s paper on politics and constitutional adjudication I have already had sight of it. My comments therefore may be seen not only as a response but a reaction as well, to some of the opinions expressed by the Constitutional Court judges in the judgements cited therein. Prof Venter posits certain considerations of how judicial officers should deal with personal convictions when required to adjudicate in matters that have political implications; these are: Not to be politically motivated when producing judgements in cases having political consequences That since this would require great effort and since it may well be impossible for a judge to divorce her/himself from ingrained predispositions and premises, a solution may be found in standards of justice with which decisions must comply rather than a preoccupation of what goes on in the mind of a judge. I believe that there is more to it than in just attempting to establish standards of justice which in any event would be established by judges themselves.