Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1

    Default Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)


  2. #2
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    29
    Posts
    527

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    Thanks for fighting on our behalf Mr. Hood!

  3. #3
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    JHB
    Posts
    3,688

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    Many Thanks,
    Thank you for all you are doing for the firearm community, its greatly appreciated.

  4. #4
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Kensington, Jhb
    Posts
    3,987

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    Many thanks!!

    Any chance we could have your thoughts on how the presentation was received.

  5. #5
    User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    5,485

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    This is an absolute bunker buster!!Well done to MJ Hood and all involved in this. No doubt there's been hours upon hours of hard work put into this.Hoping that this throws a couple of spanners into the works at CFR and SAPS in general.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)


  7. #7

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)


    COMMENTARY ON CLASSIC ARMS JUDGMENT
    Although the facts in this case seems to be complicated, they are actually quite straightforward.Classis Arms obtained two Court Orders, including punitive cost orders against the police compelling them to process export permit applications.
    The police did not comply with the Court Order, because they adopted the attitude that an internal process overruled a High Court Order and they argued that Classic Arms had given permission for the firearms that were the subject matter of the application to be removed from the export permit. They also argued that there was a criminal investigation against Classic Arms and therefore they did not have to do anything before the criminal investigation was finalised.
    You will note the Judge’s comments that criminal investigation was opened by Brigadier Mabule maliciously and nothing has happened with it.
    The Judge’s conclusion is as follows:
    “It is not unreasonable for the Applicant to expect that the Respondents ought to have indicated that the requirements were met or that it was satisfied so that it knows what to do. The Respondents simply never replied to LM4. I therefore reject their opposition and interpretation of that the Respondents attach to LM4. Their opposition is meritless and ill-founded and… It is my view therefore that the relevant court order was never fully complied with.”
    The Learned Judge then went on to grant a punitive cost order.Coincidentally with respect to the criminal investigation, although we had a case number the police said that there was no docket. This was after Classic Arms had made a statement to the police. Such is the honesty of Brigadier Mabule.

  8. #8
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Pretoria East
    Posts
    213

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    well done !!!

    Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Member Matu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    JHB
    Posts
    172

    Default Re: Brief to the Portfolio Committee on Police (1 September 2017)

    interesting read...great stuff

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •