The Judicial Officers’ Association of South Africa (Joasa) said this week that the concerns about salary increases raised by judges also apply to magistrates, whose judicial functions and responsibilities are ”virtually identical”, differing only with respect to jurisdiction.
South Africa’s judges have declined a 17% pay rise, saying that as Chief Justice Pius Langa was due to receive a 65% increase the huge disparities in salaries were divisive.
Joasa president Judy van Schalkwyk said earlier this week that ”more than 90% of court cases were dealt with in the lower courts”, meaning that most of the public’s first experience of justice was as it was applied by magistrates.
She said that the Independent Remuneration Commission (IRC), which determines salary scales for public office bearers such as judges, magistrates, politicians and traditional healers, had deviated from its finding that salary gaps between judicial officers have to be narrowed. Van Schalkwyk said the gap between the highest-paid magistrate and the chief justice was about R1-million.
The difference between Justice Langa’s new package and that of other judges will increase dramatically from R82 091 to R598 000 per annum.
”Joasa supports the idea of raising the salary of the Chief Justice so as to attract top candidates to the high court bench,” she said. ”However, the salary of the whole hierarchy has to be adjusted accordingly, merging the gaps between them, since top candidates are also sought on the lower court bench. This would also stop the great number of magistrates leaving the bench attracted into the corporate world by good salaries.”
IRC spokesperson Neil Ulrich said the commission could not respond to the Joasa statement or complaints about disparities in increases. All submissions, he said, had been made to President Thabo Mbeki. The commission’s role at this stage was to consider the submissions and engage the people who made them, before advising the president.
Judging from the IRC’s recommendations, it seems that magistrates are not as highly regarded as their higher court counterparts. In a section in the IRC’s recommendations detailing the job profiling of judicial authorities, the impression is created that the retention of judges and the attraction of younger ones is of paramount importance. It writes less flatteringly about the importance of magistrates.
The IRC says about judges: ”— the role and the value they add to the democratic process has to be recognised and therefore should be reflected in the remuneration of judicial office bearers. The attraction and retention of talent into the judiciary constitutes one of the most critical considerations in the establishment of a remuneration approach for the judiciary.”
On magistrates, the recommendations state: ”The minimum requirement to be appointed as a magistrate in the district court is a three-year legal degree and five years relevant experience. It is important to note that a district magistrate role is not an entry-level role, as significant prior legal experience is required to be competent in such position.”