|
Prophet
has spoken to all the people who
have signed the register of petitions and he expresses his deep gratitude to all who have shown their courage to come forward
and support the recovery of his home and he also says thank you to those who have
included him in their prayers.
A survey
that canvasses a pool of 10 000 people is considered by market research companies
to be extensive and is deemed to be relatively accurate in terms of how the
general public think. A one question market research survey from a pool of 10 000
people would cost between R35 000 and R95 000.
10 000 people
signed this petition and one can comment that it is biased
because it does not reveal how many people support civil forfeiture but their numbers
are indeed few and of the people that Prophet has spoken to, they number less than
three for every one thousand people contacted (0,3%). Even if we add Willie
Hofmeyr's entire staff
of the Asset Forfeiture Unit and the 17 civil court judges who ruled against
Prophet then the number of people who
agree that his home be forfeited is still insignificant in terms of public
opinion.
We live in a
constitutional democracy and the right to express ourselves is a supreme right
and it gladdens us to see that when people have the time then they do engage and
if this petition is anything to go by then yes, our democracy is working and
even though we may not be free to do everything, at least we are free to
say what we want.
One person
argued that even if Prophet had been found "not guilty" then that did
not confirm that he is innocent and in the quantum field of possibilities we can
all agree with him but we must also admit that, in South Africa, when we are
accused of criminal conduct then we must remember that supreme
non-derogable
law dictates that we are "presumed innocent" until
proven otherwise and therefore, in the context of South Africa, it follows as a
matter of fact that
if you have been acquitted of criminal wrongdoing in a
criminal court of law then you are therefore undeniably innocent and so it goes
without saying that civil asset forfeiture in the face of a "not guilty" verdict
is unconstitutional.
|