LSB, Motumise case wrongly decided

Firstly, the court, did not refer to the rudimentary tenet of construction, to wit, that constitutional provisions must be given a broad, wide and generous interpretation( see the Dow Case), obviously in view of the fact that a constitution like ours is an organic instrument which must constantly grow and evolve with the ever varying circumstances of the society(modern).

Premised on this canon of construction, i expected the court to give section 96(2) a wide interpretation which would include that where an appointing authority is vested with powers such as to appoint judges in our scenario and it decides to reject a recommended candidate it must furnish reasons for such outright rejection.