Judges fight for posts on the SCA

Five judges faced tough grilling yesterday as they vied for two positions on the bench of the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Free State judge Shamin Ebrahim; Eastern Cape judges Xola Petse, Ronnie Pillay and Clive Plasket; and Gauteng judge Brian Southwood endured a gruelling six-hour session of intense - at times uncomfortable - questioning by the Judicial Service Commission.

Justice Minister Jeff Radebe was among the commissioners.

At the end of the session, commission spokesman CP Fourie said in addition to interviewing the applicants for positions on the bench, the commission would also "interrogate" why suitable candidates were not applying for positions in other courts.

Last month, when the commission announced the short-listing of candidates, no judges were named for a vacancy on the Constitutional Court.

The Pretoria and Johannesburg high courts have six vacancies between them, but only five candidates were short-listed and no one made the list for the Electoral Court, which has one vacancy.

"We would like to encourage the best possible candidates to put themselves up for nomination. If there is a lack of that, we are concerned," said Fourie yesterday.

The Cape Town High Court, which has seven vacancies, has also been a cause for concern for the commission. Last year, the court ruled that the process used by the commission to interview candidate judges was unconstitutional and unlawful.

The commission is appealing against the judgment. As a result, it did not appoint new judges.

"We're considering whether there are ways of dealing with the issue despite the fact that the appeal is still pending," said Fourie.

During yesterday's session, two candidates, judges Petse and Plasket - who are both acting SCA judges - were asked whether the Eastern Cape could afford to lose individuals of their calibre.

"Can the province afford to lose the likes of yourself and Judge Petse?" advocate Izak Smuts asked Pasket.

Pasket responded: "I'm afraid it sounds like being punished for one's competence and I think it would send out a very bad message if the commission were to take the view that some people would not be elevated because they will leave a big hole where they come from."

Radebe also asked him if he was familiar with judicial assessment and the Department of Justice's discussion document on the transformation of the judicial system.

He said the department sought to assess the impact of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court of Appeal judgments "on our jurisprudence".

"Will I be correct to assume that . you have no problem with what the department is seeking to do?" Radebe asked.

"Well, I've had a look at the terms of reference and I can't see anything objectionable in there at all," Pasket replied.