JSC ‘changed tack on Hlophe’

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) “changed tack” on controversial Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe after President Jacob Zuma appointed four new members to it last year, the North Gauteng High Court heard this week.

Advocate Wim Trengove, acting for the NGO Freedom Under the Law (FUL), told the court that the JSC appeared to have discarded its earlier inquiries into Hlophe’s conduct, and his counterclaim against the judges of the Constitutional Court, after the change in its composition.

In the application, FUL is seeking to overturn the JSC’s decision not to proceed with its investigations.

The non-governmental pressure group, in which former judge Johann Kriegler plays a prominent role, argues that the reopening of the case is essential to maintaining the rule of law and protecting the image of the judiciary.

Trengove submitted to Judge Peter Mabuza that the JSC had been “doing everything right” in terms of its own rules when it launched an investigation into claims by judges of the Constitutional Court that Hlophe had attempted to influence the outcome of a corruption case involving Zuma.

At the time, it was thought that the corruption charges were all that stood between Zuma and the country’s presidency.

Trengove added that the JSC’s inquiry into Hlophe’s counterclaim that the justices had breached his constitutional rights by the manner in which they had lodged the complaint against him was also according to its rule-book.

But, he noted that the JSC “changed tack” after Zuma’s appointment of advocates Ismail Semenya, Dumisa Ntsebeza, Andiswa Ndoni and Vas Soni to the JSC.

The four men replaced advocate George Bizos; state advocate Kgomotso Moroko; former head of the ANC’s legal and constitutional commission and acting Northern Province premier, advocate Seth Nthai; and a representative of labour and the Public Service Commission, John Ernstzen.

The JSC then appeared to drop its earlier inquiries, which had included interviewing Constitutional Court judges.

It eventually set up a sub-committee to investigate the matter afresh before deciding not to follow up with a formal hearing.

That decision, Trengove asserted, was procedurally irregular and unconstitutional.

He also said that, according to the JSC rulebook, the sub-committee’s role was “not to evaluate the evidence” but merely to determine whether the claims against the judges were frivolous.

“At that point [the sub-committee] doesn’t inquire if it’s true or not,” said Trengove.

He said the matter of Hlophe’s conduct and his counterclaim were an obvious case where misconduct had to be ascertained because the “complaints were of gross misconduct — judges were accused of impacting upon a judgment while others were accused of conniving, cheating and lying to the public”.

These allegations had grave implications for the image of the judiciary.

In its heads of argument, the JSC contends that no decision was made on whether to pursue the complaints at the time of the JSC’s reconstitution in July last year.

Its new members had to acquaint themselves with the case, which was why it was started afresh.

But Trengove attacked these denials, calling them a “misapprehension”. He asserted that the decision to follow through with a formal JSC hearing had been taken a year earlier.

He provided transcripts of a JSC meeting on July 5 2008 at which the matter was discussed by the commissioners. According to the transcripts, there was unanimity that the charges of gross misconduct had to be tested.

The JSC’s subsequent conduct — including calling for a submission on whether the hearings should be open or closed — and affidavits bore out the fact that it was preparing for a hearing, Trengove argued.

The hearing continues on Friday.

PW Botha wagged his finger and banned us in 1988 but we stood firm. We built a reputation for fearless journalism, then, and now. Through these last 35 years, the Mail & Guardian has always been on the right side of history.

These days, we are on the trail of the merry band of corporates and politicians robbing South Africa of its own potential.

To help us ensure another 35 future years of fiercely independent journalism, please subscribe.

Niren Tolsi
Niren Tolsi

Niren Tolsi is a freelance journalist.

His areas of interest include social justice; citizen mobilisation and state violence; protest; the constitution and the constitutional court and football.


South Africa has been junked

Treasury says the credit ratings downgrade “could not have come at a worse time”, as country enters a 21-day Covid-19 lockdown with little money saved up

Mail & Guardian needs your help

Our job is to help give you the information we all need to participate in building this country, while holding those in power to account. But now the power to help us keep doing that is in your hands

Press Releases

The online value of executive education in a Covid-19 world

Executive education courses further develop the skills of leaders in the workplace

Sisa Ntshona urges everyone to stay home, and consider travelling later

Sisa Ntshona has urged everyone to limit their movements in line with government’s request

SAB Zenzele’s special AGM postponed until further notice

An arrangement has been announced for shareholders and retailers to receive a 77.5% cash payout

20th Edition of the National Teaching Awards

Teachers are seldom recognised but they are indispensable to the country's education system

Awards affirm the vital work that teachers do

Government is committed to empowering South Africa’s teachers with skills, knowledge and techniques for a changing world

SAB Zenzele special AGM rescheduled to March 25 2020

New voting arrangements are being made to safeguard the health of shareholders

Dimension Data launches Saturday School in PE

The Gauteng Saturday School has produced a number of success stories