The Constitutional Court will on Tuesday hear a case relating to pardons when it is asked to judge and application by an Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging member.

In March, the High Court in Johannesburg issued a temporary interdict preventing the President from granting pardons to perpetrators of political violence without first consulting the victims or disclosing the details of the process.

Ryan Albutt, a pardon applicant, the President and the Minister of Justice will appeal against the order.

The court will also consider an application for direct access challenging the constitutionality of Section 1 of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 2000 (Paja), brought by Albutt and supported by the President and the Minister (which concerns the definition of administrative action subject to review by the courts).

The case concerns a special process for the handling of pardon requests announced by former President Thabo Mbeki on November 21, 2007. The process was available to people convicted of offences they claimed were politically motivated, and who were not denied amnesty by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Mbeki established a Pardons Reference Group (PRG) on which each political party in Parliament was represented. The PRG was formally constituted on January 18, 2008.

It considered 2114 applications for pardons and made recommendations to the president.

From February 2008 to March 2009, the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) and other non-governmental organisations attempted unsuccessfully to influence the PRG, the President and the Minister to ensure victim participation in the process.

They also sought greater transparency and public disclosure. After they failed to secure the participation of victims, they lodged an urgent application in the high court to prevent the President from issuing political pardons pending the final determination of the rights of victims.

The high court held victims of crime had a right to be heard before the President exercised his pardon.

It granted an order restraining the president from exercising this power until the main application was decided.

Lawyers for Albutt, the President and the Minister are challenging this interim order on two main grounds.

Part of Albutt, the President and the Minister's contention is that the order violated the separation of powers principle, by intruding on a power entrusted to the executive, by requiring the president to give victims a hearing before granting a pardon.

The CSVR and the other non-governmental organisations are opposing the application for leave to appeal and for direct access, and support the judgment of the high court.

They also contend the order of the high court is not appealable because it is an interim order and the main case is yet to be decided