“Our client is of the view that the JSC's decision was riddled with procedural and substantive errors which render it null and void,” Miya Attorneys wrote to the president.
The law firm said Hlophe made comprehensive written representations to the JSC before the commission took its decision.
It said the representations requested that the JSC allow Hophe’s legal representatives to make oral submissions in the meeting of the JSC due to the complexity of the issues involved in the matter.
The law firm said the JSC did not respond to the request, and, without explanation, failed to provide an opportunity for Hlophe's legal representatives to address the JSC in its meeting of Monday.
Miya Attorneys said the JSC decision to make the recommendation for a suspension while the matter is the subject of an application pending before the Supreme Court of Appeal to review and set aside the JSC's 2021 decision constituted a flagrant interference with the court processes.
The law firm said there was no recommendation to suspend Hlophe after the JSC's 2021 decision.
It said it was only after Hlophe was granted leave to appeal to the SCA last month that the JSC sought to retaliate against him by hastily convening a meeting to recommended his suspension.
“Our client would accordingly appreciate the president's undertaking not to suspend Hlophe JP or take any actions in respect of the JSC's recommendations pending the court's decision in the aforegoing application, by no later than the close of business on Friday, 29 July 2022 failing which we hold instructions to approach the court for an interdict on an urgent basis thereunder.”
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.