South Africa’s ministry of justice and constitutional development says there is no truth in the assertion that President Thabo Mbeki has intervened and stopped the formal consideration of the “judges Bills”.
In a statement on Friday, the ministry said the Bills “are still being considered and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development will continue to interact with the judiciary on them”.
The Mail & Guardian reported on Friday that controversial draft legislation aimed at overhauling the structure of the judiciary had been shelved after the intervention of Mbeki.
Spokesperson for the justice ministry Zolile Nqayi — noting that his department was responding to two M&G articles, “Thabo Mbeki axes judges Bills” and “De Lange: Tiger or teddy bear?” — said: “Sadly, both articles repeat the misconception and fiction that Minister [Brigitte] Mabandla and the Deputy Minister [Johnny] De Lange do not agree on the Bills.
“It is sensational and mischievous on the part of the author to attempt to suggest that President Mbeki and Minister Mabandla are at odds with Deputy Minister De Lange’s stance on the Bills. Another long-standing myth is the portrayal of Deputy Minister De Lange as the prime mover behind the Bills.
“The fact is that Minister Mabandla is championing the Bills,” the ministry said.
Noting that the lead article by M&G journalist Nic Dawes “repeats another piece of gossip”, first published by the M&G in 2004, about an alleged conflict between Mabandla and De Lange, the ministry said there is no such conflict.
Speaking to the M&G Online on Friday evening, Dawes said he stands by the story.
“I stand by the story and we raised issues that are in the public interest. I think questions about the conduct of key players on matters of grave constitutional importance are of immense public interest,” he said.
Dawes reported that the Bills were central to the package of measures devised by the justice ministry and Parliament’s justice committee, ostensibly to improve access to justice and accelerate the transformation of the judiciary.
He also reported that while plans to rationalise the structure of the courts were generally welcomed, constitutional changes to hand full control of administrative functions to the justice minister, and to give the president an expanded role in the appointment of senior judicial officers, were widely seen as undermining the independence of the judiciary.
But he reported senior government and parliamentary officials, as well as judges familiar with the intense lobbying that had surrounded the Superior Courts Bill and the draft Constitution 14th Amendment Bill, said formal consideration of the proposed laws had been suspended, and would not begin again until they were redrafted, which would probably not happen until next year.
The proposed constitutional changes were likely to be scrapped entirely, it was reported.
The newspaper reported that the legislation appeared to have been put on hold following the direct intervention of Mbeki, who, according to four people close to the process, first gave instructions that the period for public comment be extended, and then told Mabandla to come up with proposals more acceptable to the judiciary.
Those moves, according to the newspaper, had put De Lange at odds with both Mbeki and Mabandla, and sharpened tensions in Parliament over the extent to which executive pressure was brought to bear on processes in the National Assembly.