29:
189:. The court held that a person could only be convicted of "scandalising the court" for a statement made outside of the court if that statement "really was likely to damage the administration of justice". The court also held that the procedure applied in the
193:
for prosecution of the offence, whereby the judge could summon the accused, question him and summarily convict him of contempt, was an unjustifiable violation of the
108:
287:
239:
148:
282:
292:
178:
39:
297:
90:
190:
194:
8:
28:
214:
144:
186:
182:
116:
112:
105:
267:
74:
120:
132:
128:
276:
124:
151:
136:
243:
140:
240:"South Africa: S v. Mamabolo (e.tv and Others Intervening)"
274:
215:"The State v Russell Mamabolo: Media Summary"
288:Constitutional Court of South Africa cases
27:
275:
220:. Constitutional Court. 11 April 2001
181:dealt with the relationship between
179:Constitutional Court of South Africa
77:, 2001 (3) SA 409, 2001 (5) BCLR 449
40:Constitutional Court of South Africa
13:
14:
309:
261:
283:South African criminal case law
293:2001 in South African case law
232:
207:
50:The State v Russell Mamabolo
1:
200:
91:Transvaal Provincial Division
7:
10:
314:
162:
157:
101:
96:
86:
81:
70:
55:
45:
35:
26:
21:
16:South African legal case
177:is a case in which the
59:11 April 2001
75:[2001] ZACC 17
195:right to a fair trial
298:Free speech case law
268:Text of the judgment
187:freedom of speech
183:contempt of court
170:
169:
305:
255:
254:
252:
250:
236:
230:
229:
227:
225:
219:
211:
97:Court membership
66:
64:
31:
19:
18:
313:
312:
308:
307:
306:
304:
303:
302:
273:
272:
264:
259:
258:
248:
246:
238:
237:
233:
223:
221:
217:
213:
212:
208:
203:
62:
60:
17:
12:
11:
5:
311:
301:
300:
295:
290:
285:
271:
270:
263:
262:External links
260:
257:
256:
231:
205:
204:
202:
199:
168:
167:
164:
160:
159:
155:
154:
103:
102:Judges sitting
99:
98:
94:
93:
88:
84:
83:
79:
78:
72:
68:
67:
57:
53:
52:
47:
46:Full case name
43:
42:
37:
33:
32:
24:
23:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
310:
299:
296:
294:
291:
289:
286:
284:
281:
280:
278:
269:
266:
265:
245:
241:
235:
216:
210:
206:
198:
196:
192:
188:
184:
180:
176:
175:
165:
161:
158:Case opinions
156:
153:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
107:
104:
100:
95:
92:
89:
87:Appealed from
85:
80:
76:
73:
69:
58:
54:
51:
48:
44:
41:
38:
34:
30:
25:
20:
247:. Retrieved
234:
222:. Retrieved
209:
174:S v Mamabolo
173:
172:
171:
82:Case history
49:
22:S v Mamabolo
163:Decision by
277:Categories
244:ARTICLE 19
201:References
191:High Court
106:Chaskalson
63:2001-04-11
117:Goldstone
113:Ackermann
71:Citations
166:Kriegler
145:Madlanga
121:Kriegler
149:Somyalo
129:Mokgoro
61: (
56:Decided
249:7 June
224:7 June
147:&
141:Yacoob
139:&
133:Ngcobo
125:Madala
218:(PDF)
137:Sachs
36:Court
251:2013
226:2013
185:and
143:JJ,
152:AJJ
279::
242:.
197:.
135:,
131:,
127:,
123:,
119:,
115:,
111:,
253:.
228:.
109:P
65:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
