The Amalgamated Lawyers Association has urgently requested documents related to the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) decision last week to recommend the suspension of two judges, paving the way for legal action.
In a letter to the JSC, the association said it “seeks to interdict the President of the Republic of South Africa from implementing the JSC’s decision”.
It has also asked for the office of the chief justice’s (OCJ) latest report on outstanding judgments and “all complaints lodged against any other judge for failure to deliver reserved judgments”.
The JSC announced on Friday that it had decided that Gauteng High Court judges Tshifhiwa Maumela and Nomonde Mngqibisa-Thusi should face judicial conduct tribunals, to investigate potentially impeachable conduct over “numerous reserved judgments”.
In Maumela’s case, three judgments were outstanding for more than two years. However, by the time the Judicial Conduct Committee (JCC) made its decision, they had been delivered.
In Mngqibisa-Thusi's case, by the time the complaint against her was decided by the JCC, there were five judgments still outstanding for more than a year.
The committee listed others that had since been delivered, but had taken an unduly long time — including one that had taken 27 months.
The JCC recommended tribunals for the two judges and the JSC last week considered the recommendations. It decided, according to a media statement, that “the failure to deliver the reserved judgments, if established, will prima facie indicate incapacity, gross incompetence or gross misconduct”.
The JSC also said it would recommend to President Cyril Ramaphosa that the two be suspended pending the tribunal’s outcome.
But the association said it was seeking to “interrogate” the JSC decision and interdict the suspension — “pending both review application proceedings and provision of the updated reports from the OCJ relating to reserved judgments for the period 31 December 2022”.
The OCJ provided reserved judgment reports, listing those that were reserved for longer than six months. These reports were published on the judiciary’s website and regularly updated. But last week GroundUp reported that the OCJ had not published an update since December 31 2021. Despite repeated requests for updated data, no response had been forthcoming, said the report.
The association's letter said the “impending updated report” from the OCJ as well as complaints that may have been lodged with the JSC “against other judges for similar misconduct” could “present a live controversy”.
It has asked the JSC to provide all the documents by Friday — “to enable us to exercise our rights ... and make an informed decision on the steps to be taken, should it become necessary”.
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.