Available information on the Vusi Pikoli saga seemed to indicate interference with constitutional safeguards, the Johannesburg Bar Council said on Thursday.
The continuing controversy and speculation about the suspension of the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) required a strong and unambiguous response from the government that there was not, and will not in future, be any political or other interference in the judicial system, the council said in a statement.
”Regrettably, such a response has not been forthcoming. We are forced to rely on what we glean from the media.”
It was disquieting that acting NDPP Mokotedi Mpshe apparently thought it appropriate to approach a different magistrate to the one who had issued the warrant of arrest for police National Commissioner Jackie Selebi to cancel the warrant, and that he did so after hours.
It was even more alarming that he reportedly claimed he ”doesn’t know anything about the warrant”.
”We commend the actions of the [Deputy Judge President] of the Witwatersrand Local Division, Judge Phineas Mojapelo, who reportedly refused to accede to a similar request.”
The independence of the judiciary and the constitutional requirement that the prosecuting authority exercised its functions without fear, favour or prejudice were cornerstones of SA’s young democracy.
”At present, and with the information in the public domain, it seems to us that there may have been interference with these constitutional safeguards. If so, it is a crisis,” the council said.
The issues around Pikoli’s suspension did not stand in isolation.
It was common knowledge that many government departments refused to comply with court judgements.
It showed a worrying disrespect for the courts. There had also been unwarranted attacks on the judiciary.
”In this regard we especially condemn the unprecedented and intemperate attack on Judge Jajbahy by officials of the Department of Health in a paid newspaper advertisement.”
The council called upon the government to demonstrate, clearly and unambiguously, that the independence of the judiciary was respected and protected and that the prosecuting authority could indeed exercise its functions ”without fear, favour or prejudice”.
”If this is not done urgently, it will be difficult to counter accusations that there has indeed been interference in the judicial and prosecutorial independence.
”Apart from its obvious implication for the rule of law, such interference will also be a betrayal of the ideals of those who have fought for our democracy,” the council said. – Sapa