There is an old African folktale of the hare and the baboon. The story goes that Hare and his family held a huge feast and invited his uncle Baboon and family. On the morning of the day Hare and family burned the whole surroundings of his homestead. When Baboon and family arrived for the feast Hare advised them to go to the river to wash their hands first for no one with dirty hands could enjoy the feast. Baboon and family returned and upon inspection Hare maintained that their hands were still dirty. Because Baboon could not avoid touching the burnt surroundings, his hands were always dirty each time he returned from the river. Thus he never joined the feast on account of his dirty hands. He got frustrated and left. But the story goes further as, later that year, Baboon and family held an even bigger feast. He invited his nephew Hare and family. But the venue was up in the trees. Hare and family arrived but could not climb trees and so they salivated on the ground as Baboon and company enjoyed their feast. Sadly many of us seem to have forgotten the wisdom in these folk tales. This article is a follow up to a critique of the Supreme Court judgement in the ANZ case that was delivered on the 11/09/2003. In that judgement, the Court refused to hear the application brought by ANZ (Publishers of the Daily News and The Daily News on Sunday) challenging certain sections of the notorious Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). That unprecedented refusal to hear a constitutional application was based on the ground that ANZ had "unclean hands" because they had failed to comply with a law whose validity they were challenging. In that critique, the author argued, with all due respect, the Supreme Court had erred in applying the doctrine of Clean Hands, a doctrine of equity, in a matter involving the determination of fundamental constitutional rights. Such an application of the doctrine of Clean Hands poses a great hazard to the protection and uninterrupted enjoyment of human rights, says the author.