Criticism levelled against judges following their ruling on sexual consent is misinformed and proceeds from the incorrect premise that the version of the complainant constituted the factual basis for the judgment, or ought to have done so, writes Craig Watt-Pringle.
The recent Makhanda High Court ruling by Acting Judge Tembeka Ngcukaitobi (with Judge Nyameko Gqamana concurring) that Loyiso Coko was not guilty of rape because threats or coercion were absent is a ridiculous and archaic understanding of the crime of rape.
Acting Judge Tembeka Ngcukaitobi has ruled in favour of an appeal by Loyiso Coko, who argued that the foreplay he had with his ex-girlfriend indicated she tacitly consented to sex.