Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke has dismissed suggestions that an anti-Zuma vendetta on his part is a factor in the Constitutional Court’s complaint against Cape Judge President John Hlophe.
Testifying before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) in Johannesburg last week, Moseneke defended the court’s decision late last year to lodge a complaint with the JSC against Hlophe after he allegedly improperly tried to influence two judges in relation to cases involving ANC president Jacob Zuma.
Also testifying last week, the two judges, Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta, said Hlophe had tried to persuade them to reach a conclusion favourable to Zuma.
Moseneke told the commission that the perception, created by some in the ANC, that he was anti-Zuma was untrue. He had nothing personal against Zuma, he said, so it is ”unnecessary for me to look at the history of my relationship” with him. ”I have known [Zuma] from way back. Our relationship has remained cordial ever since I knew him.”
The Constitutional Court judges have been under attack from the ANC and its allies since the judges lodged their complaint against Hlophe’s alleged misconduct last year.
Moseneke, who has been tipped to replace Pius Langa as chief justice, has been painted as the leading architect of a plot to destroy Zuma. There have also been suggestions that Zuma prefers Hlophe to Moseneke for the post of chief justice.
Last year the ANC and the ANC Youth League attacked Moseneke after his reported remark that ”I have chosen my work very carefully. It is not what the ANC want, or what delegates want, it is what is good for our people.” Moseneke’s remarks, made privately and widely reported, were seen by many in the ANC as a swipe against Zuma.
But perceptions of his anti-Zuma bias are ”very unfortunate”, Moseneke told the JSC. ”I take seriously the oath of office. I have been a judge since 2001. I don’t know why I should take sides. I consider myself to be of service to all the people. That duty I don’t owe to any political formation,” he said.
The decision to lodge a complaint against Hlophe had nothing to do with any personal vendetta against either Zuma or the Cape judge president, but was to protect the integrity of the highest court in the land, he said.
Moseneke and Langa were the first witnesses to take the stand this week at the JSC hearings, set up to deal with complaints that Hlophe attempted to persuade Nkabinde and Jafta to influence the country’s highest court to rule in favour of Zuma in his battle with the National Prosecuting Authority.
Nkabinde told the hearings on Wednesday that she had received a call from Hlophe in which he made an appointment to see her in chambers. ”He said to me he had a mandate. He indicated that he wanted us to discuss the matter of privilege,” she said.
During the meeting Hlophe had told her that Zuma was being persecuted, like him. ”He said that the privilege issue needed to be looked at very carefully because the decision on Zuma relied on that.”
Nkabinde also said that Hlophe told her he was close to several Cabinet ministers, and that he had a list of people who would lose their jobs when Zuma took over as South Africa’s president. Both Nkabinde and Jafta said they had made it clear to Hlophe that he was not entitled to interfere in the Zuma case.
Regarding their joint statement earlier to the JSC, where they asserted their reluctance to give evidence, they said this was based on the fact that they did not want to act as individual judges and wanted the Constitutional Court to make a collective decision.
The commission decided to proceed this week despite Hlophe’s controversial absence from the hearings.
Hlophe’s lawyers walked out of the hearings on Tuesday after the JSC rejected their application for further postponement. Hlophe’s counsel, advocate Vuyani Ngalwana, had said it would be difficult for the legal team to proceed with the matter in the absence of Hlophe, who is suffering from a ”mischievous bout of influenza”.
The hearings were postponed for the second time on Saturday after Hlophe’s new senior counsel, Brian Pincus, requested more time to study the papers. But on Tuesday, Ngalwana told the commission that Hlophe had lost confidence in Pincus and that he would lead the legal team.
Both Langa and Moseneke rejected Hlophe’s claims that they had persuaded Nkabinde and Jafta to make statements against Hlophe. Although Nkabinde and Jafta were reluctant to be the complainants, Moseneke told the hearings, he had felt duty bound to report the matter to the JSC.