Mloo Mbokazi

Adv Tembeka Ngcukaitobi: “We are asking for a non-custodial punishment, and no one can sensibly say that other forms of punishment do not constitute punishment...you have a range of penal options that would reflect the society’s disapproval.” This is quite interesting coming from Adv Ngcukaitobi. In 2021, during the Zondo Commission/Jacob Zuma ConCourt proceedings, Ngcukaitobi explicitly told the court that the two years imprisonment sought by the Zondo commission was a serious penalty that took into consideration Zuma’s seniority and political standing. He further said the court should consider Zuma’s influence in society and the public nature of his disobedience. And on the question of a suspended sentence, Ngcukaitobi was unambiguous: “The question really is how long Mr Zuma should go to prison for? That he should go to prison should be clear.” To reiterate, in the Julius Malema case today, Ngcukaitobi is arguing that a custodial sentence is not the only option, that there’s a range of penal options available and that imprisonment actually achieves the opposite of what society wants. Yet in the Zuma matter, his position was the exact reverse. He told that court that a fine was out of the question, and that imprisonment was a “clear, effective remedy.” He specifically argued that a suspended sentence was inappropriate for Zuma, and that the only real question was how long Zuma should go to prison, not whether he should. So, the same advocate who argued there was essentially one appropriate punishment, i.e. direct imprisonment for Zuma, is now criticising the prosecution for allegedly thinking there is only one punishment for Malema. In Zuma’s case, whom he stringently presented as a former head of state, defying the highest court in the land, Ngcukaitobi pushed for the harshest custodial outcome available, using Zuma’s status as an aggravating factor. In Malema’s case, he is now arguing that imprisonment is counterproductive and that a person’s status should be irrelevant.

Why Elon Musk is RIGHT to fight South Africa’s racist rules blocking Starlink? Imagine this: Long ago, South Africa had very unfair laws called apartheid. They treated Black people badly and kept them from good jobs and money. When those bad laws ended, the country made new rules (called B-BBEE) to help Black people get a fair share of business. The idea was good – like a big helping hand. But now? For companies like Starlink to sell fast internet, they MUST give away 30% of their business to Black partners. Just because of skin color. Elon Musk was born in South Africa. He left as a teen to chase big dreams. Today, his company SpaceX wants to bring Starlink – super fast satellite internet – to South Africa. But the rules say no unless they give up part of the company. Elon said it right: “Starlink is not allowed because I’m not Black.” SpaceX promised to spend about $30 million (that’s 500 million rand!) to give FREE high-speed internet to 5,000 rural schools. That helps over 2.4 MILLION kids every year learn better, get jobs later, and have a brighter future. Real help for the people who need it most! Starlink already works in about 24 other African countries. Villages there now have internet for school, doctors, and business. South Africa’s villages are missing out because of these racist rules. Elon isn’t asking for special favors. He just wants fair play so Starlink can connect everyone fast. Internet = education, jobs, hope. Why hold back millions of kids over rules that pick by race and color?

My uncle, who relocated to the U.S. in 2019, is currently facing a very difficult situation with his wife. Before he traveled, he was dating a Nigerian girl and promised to return, marry her, and take her to the U.S. with him. However, after a few years abroad, he married a white woman and they now have two children together. He never told the woman in Nigeria about his marriage and children, yet they continued communicating. He was even planning to come back home this year to marry her, as he had promised. Unfortunately, his wife recently found out about everything. She left with their two children and has restricted his access to finances, as she is the one behind his wealth. All efforts to reach her has been unsuccessful. He is now in serious distress and even fears being deported. ((Real answer plz))