Candidate judge withdraws application after ‘inappropriate kiss’ allegation

One of the candidates in the running for a judge’s position in the Gauteng high court division on Tuesday withdrew his application after allegations he acted inappropriately towards a female attorney.

Adv Brad Wanless had had a smooth interview, but begrudgingly withdrew his application after the allegations were thrust into the spotlight before the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), where he was being interviewed.

The complaint was taken to the Johannesburg Society of Advocates after his candidacy was announced several weeks ago.

Several of the commissioners, including EFF leader Julius Malema, president of the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) Mandisa Maya and adv Dali Mpofu SC were among those who advised Wanless to halt the process while waiting for his name to be cleared.

Wanless tried to convince the commission otherwise, reducing the incident to nothing but a witch-hunt by a male colleague with whom he had worked on a matter in 2013 and who now had an “axe to grind”.

In my defence, the reason why I would not do that: the fact that I have four daughters, I’m a committed Christian and the fact that I’ve worked with hundreds, if not thousands, of women. There’s never been a single complaint in my entire life and I am now 58 years of age.

—  Adv Brad Wanless SC

The incident, which has cast Wanless’s suitability for the position into doubt, allegedly involved a young candidate attorney whose name Wanless said he could no longer remember.

He said according to the written complaint he was alleged to have taken “this lady by the shoulders, brought her forward and kissed her on the lips in front of everybody to say goodbye. It’s nothing else,” he said, maintaining he had no recollection of the incident and adding that the allegations were “baseless”.

He pleaded innocence, questioning why this incident, alleged to have happened in 2013, was only brought to the fore once it became known he was a candidate for a vacant seat in the Gauteng high court. He had written a 50-page report in response to the allegations.

The commissioners advised Wanless to withdraw, saying they had no powers to investigate and clear him, but needed to be sure this cloud would not hang over him if he were appointed as a judge.

Maya stressed they could not overlook the issue, saying: “If there is any truth to the allegations then he will certainly be disqualified from judicial office and any other occupations.”

Trying to ascertain the details behind the incident, commissioner Jane Cane SC questioned whether the conduct described in the documents could be something a man would deem warm and appropriate then, but is considered inappropriate today as SA grapples with incidents of gender-based violence.

Wanless agreed, saying it could indeed be deemed inappropriate, but maintaining he could not recall the incident.

“You’re quite right that there was no independent recollection of what happened or if there even was a goodbye. The probabilities as I have set out in my document are just so far against me doing anything that would have been inappropriate in front of all of them — the four other attorneys (who were reportedly present when the incident happened), in front of the public, in front of the coffee shop that was populated largely by the members of the legal fraternity, in broad daylight.

“Had I wanted to do anything inappropriate in respect of this lady I would have chosen a more opportune moment to do so. There’s nothing like that. In my defence, the reason why I would not do that: the fact that I have four daughters, I’m a committed Christian and the fact that I’ve worked with hundreds, if not thousands, of women. There’s never been a single complaint in my entire life and I am now 58 years of age,” he said.

The commissioners stressed that Wanless withdrawing his candidacy was not an admission of guilt but simply him showing solidarity with victims of gender-based violence.

Chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng submitted that it would have been best for him to have withdrawn earlier.

“Upon receipt of the complaint, the candidate should have seriously considered withdrawing and find avenues which could find finality with the matter,” he said, adding that they could not turn a blind eye to the allegations.

Wanless responded: “I appreciate that judges need to be put under the highest scrutiny. However, what I also trusted ... is that if this is allowed to happen, it’s a true indictment of the procedure because every time a candidate comes up for consideration and there is somebody out there with an axe to grind [this can happen again],” adding that it was not the first time a candidate had had to withdraw because of pending investigations.

“I am now left trying to fend off these allegations, something that has come up out of the blue nine years later and the most important thing is, if this kind of system is not curtailed, it opens up this commission so that it cannot do its crucial duty in deciding who is a suitable candidate,” Wanless said.

Though he was encouraged to deal with the allegations and return later to pursue the post, a pained Wanless said he felt he would now “never have a fair shot at the position because of these allegations, despite the sacrifices” he had made.

After an adjournment, he told the commission he had consulted with his lawyers and decided to withdraw.

“I just want to say, once again, that obviously I deny that in any way whatsoever did I intend to make this particular lady feel in any way threatened or embarrassed, or that my behaviour was in any way intentionally inappropriate. Having said that, I would like to say I have contacted an attorney who will be, as soon as possible, instituting proceedings on my behalf,” he said.

The JSC accepted this, leaving 12 candidates for the six vacancies.

The commission has since announced its recommendations for the post.

They include Nelisa Mali, Gcinumuzi Malindi, Norman Manoim, Mandla Mbongwe, Portia Phahlane and Mashudu Munzhelele.