Legal professional Elzanne Jonker’s candidacy for one of five vacancies in the Western Cape Division of the High Court has been scrutinised over perceived bias stemming from her long-standing professional ties to the DA.
Jonker was among the applicants interviewed by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) on Tuesday. During her testimony, she detailed her extensive qualifications, which include a BA Law and an LLB from Stellenbosch University. She has practiced as an admitted attorney since 2004.
The proceedings took a sharp turn after it was revealed that due to Jonker’s extensive legal work for the DA, the party’s representatives on the JSC recused themselves from the interview process.
Jonker clarified she is not a member of the DA and has represented other political entities, including the ACDP and community forums at local government level.
“I’ve made a concerted effort over my 24 years of practice not to [affiliate]. I’ve never been a member of a political party because I value my independence as a practitioner,” she said. “As a judge, I will apply the law to the facts, regardless of the party appearing before me.”
Her candidacy faced objections including:
- Transformation: Critics argued her application failed to demonstrate a serious commitment to the transformation of the legal profession.
- Experience: Concerns were raised that she has not yet acquired sufficient judicial experience.
- Impartiality: Doubts were cast on her ability to remain neutral in politically charged cases given her history with the DA.
I don’t hide that I’ve been acting for the DA. It is a relationship of trust. I have acted as an independent legal practitioner and have never been involved in the internal workings of the party. Maintaining that independence goes a long way in establishing that I will be impartial
— Elzanne Jonker, high court candidate
In response to the transformation concerns, Jonker argued her appointment would contribute to a more diverse judiciary.
“Yes, I am white, but I am also female, which will contribute to the transformation of the bench,” she told the commission. “There is no doubt I have contributed to transformation within my own practice.”
Addressing her association with the DA, Jonker assured the commission she would remain impartial in matters involving the party. She disclosed she has represented the DA for 15 years but maintained a strictly professional boundary.
“I don’t hide that I’ve been acting for the DA. It is a relationship of trust. I have acted as an independent legal practitioner and have never been involved in the internal workings of the party. Maintaining that independence goes a long way in establishing that I will be impartial.”
She noted that many legal practitioners have been elevated to the bench despite having represented political parties in the past, asserting there is “no reason to believe such individuals cannot adjudicate with an impartial mind”
When asked if she would consider a “cooling-off” period — ceasing work for the DA before ascending to the bench — Jonker admitted it would be a difficult transition.
“It’s a difficult situation because my practice consists mostly of that client. To tell a client no, you don’t do justice to that client.”
She said there is currently no-one else in her firm to whom she could delegate that work, but she maintained that her workload would not be an impediment to her elevation.
The JSC interview proceedings are ongoing as the commission continues to vet the remaining candidates.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.