Justice department officials were unable to explain on Tuesday why a Pretoria judge appeared in a magistrate’s chambers, instead of an open court, in connection with a drunken-driving incident.
”It is unusual in a criminal matter for the case to be heard in chambers. It is usually heard in an open court,” spokesperson Zolile Nqayi said.
He said a case may be heard in chambers if the presiding officer or both parties make an application to do so.
”And there has to be reasons for that,” Nqayi said.
On Tuesday, Pretoria High Court judge Nkola Motata appeared briefly in the magistrate’s chambers in Hillbrow courts.
Magistrate Herman Visser said the senior prosecutor had requested that Motata appear in chambers.
”The director of public prosecutions is still waiting for the blood [test] results so that they can decide whether to prosecute or not,” he said.
Nqayi said he could not comment on Motata’s case as he did not have information about it.
Motata was arrested on charges of drunken driving last month after he reportedly drove into a wall in Hurlingham, Johannesburg.
He allegedly resisted arrest and was put in a police car at the scene by five metro police officers.
Metro police said two women officers on the scene had called for assistance after the driver became ”uncooperative”.
Motata was arrested and released on bail of R1 000 from the Parkview police station.
He is currently on leave of absence from duty until the end of February.
The South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef) said it was shocked at the privileged treatment accorded Motata.
”Sanef protests at this favoured treatment — reminiscent of the pampering accorded ANC’s Tony Yengeni after being sentenced to a term of imprisonment and businessman Schabir Shaik after he had been jailed,” said Raymond Louw, the chairperson of Sanef’s media freedom committee.
According to reports, journalists waited for hours in the court where Motata was due to appear — and where others arrested in similar circumstances would normally appear.
They were later told Motata’s case had been dealt with by a magistrate in chambers where it had been postponed to April 13.
”Sanef also protests at the manner in which journalists were given the run-around and misinformed about the case by police and court officials.
”This disgraceful conduct amounts to serious disinformation and censorship unacceptable in terms of normal court practice and the Constitution,” said Louw. – Sapa