Why can’t the president be like other husbands?

I WONDER if someone could clarify a question I have regarding bigamy in our country.

As far as I am aware, it is against the law to have more than one wife at a time.

Nelson Mandela married three times, but divorced twice. Thabo Mbeki has been married to one woman only.

Jacob Zuma has married many women, but I am guessing these are traditional marriages and not, by South African law, legal.

So why should the taxpayer have to pay for each wife to have their own home/homes, security personnel, secretaries, staff, motor vehicles and a very nice income to cover their luxurious lifestyles?

What stops Zuma from taking on more wives? Surely what applies to other South Africans, one legal wife at a time, should also apply to the president.

Should Zuma wish to accumulate women willing to be part of his household, it should be his responsibility to maintain them from his income.

Why should there be one law for us and another for a president who sometimes likes to follow a Western lifestyle, and at other times, when it suits him, to fall back on his cultural tradition? JO MAXWELL

Pinelands THIS is the silly season some say. It is the time to be jolly, they say.

We may be on holiday, a time during which we are liable to shed our inhibitions and usually impeccable conduct, behaviour and mannerisms. This is the time, however, especially when tongues and hidden thoughts and beliefs get lubricated, so here are some suggestions worth reading and heeding.

Ignorance is not an option as one employee who posted what seemed an innocuous statement on Twitter cost her her job. Although this was based on American labour law and company policy, SA law is abreast with international developments and good practice directives and regulations. Be wise. I have always held the firm opinion that what we post on Twitter and/or Facebook has serious consequences. This, as well as the matter I refer to in the next paragraph, gainsay how social media sites have become platforms for inappropriate comments bordering on slander, libel or defamation. Apart from that, little do social mediaphiles realise that every word written on social media sites can prove to be toxic.

There was a case I tweeted about and posted on Facebook as well as mentioned in a blog piece earlier this year about an ex-wife who sued her ex-husband and his wife for defamation for a post on Facebook, and she was awarded R40 000 damages. Both the ex-husband – who did not post that status message, but allowed his wife to post it on to his Facebook page – and his wife were “jointly and severally” liable.

As a lawyer engaging the media and involved in media and constitutional/human rights issues, I have been watching with alarm how neglectful or vicious or venomous social mediaphiles can be.

Developments in our law as well as bearing in mind decisions handed down in our courts must place everyone on warning. You have the right to silence – exercise it. SABER AHMED JAZBHAY

Durban