Parliament is considering putting suspended Western Cape judge president John Hlophe's impeachment back on the table.
Parliament put the matter in abeyance in September 2021 when Hlophe approached the Gauteng High Court seeking an interdict to stay the impending impeachment and his suspension by President Cyril Ramaphosa.
This was a month after the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) decided by a majority vote Hlophe was guilty of gross misconduct after a 2008 complaint by all the then justices of the Constitutional Court.
The ConCourt justices complained he had sought to influence the outcome of cases then pending before the court related to corruption charges against former president Jacob Zuma.
The JSC’s decision was sent to parliament, in terms of the constitution, to decide whether to impeach.
Hlophe was going to appeal the JSC finding but because of lack of funding he couldn’t file his record of appeal. He was suspended in December 2022 and his appeal [period] lapsed in January 2023.
After a push by DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube, the National Assembly’s programming committee heard on Thursday there was nothing stopping parliament dealing with the matter.
“We have checked with legal services and they advise there is no impediment and the matter could be dealt with,” said National Assembly secretary Masibulele Xaso.
“In 2021, when the matter served before this committee, because there were still appeals underway, this committee was of the view that this matter should be held in abeyance. So it’s this committee that should activate the process should it deem it appropriate.”
Gwarube said it was incumbent on the committee to revive the matter so the report can serve before the assembly and reach a decision.
“None of these appeals have materialised. It’s important that we take the decision to revive the matter so we can see it to its conclusion.”
She was supported by UDM chief whip Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, who said the matter needed to be finalised before the term of the sixth parliament ended. “We have a responsibility to act on it and act on it as soon as possible,” he said.
Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula said a decision on how to proceed would be taken at the committee’s meeting next Thursday.
A two-thirds majority vote is required to impeach.
Before putting the matter on hold in 2021, MPs were advised by parliament’s legal services that there was no need for the institution to hold another inquiry into Hlophe’s conduct, as its role is limited to a “check and balance” function.
Parliament legal adviser Barbara Loots said unlike a section 89 or 194 impeachment process, parliament does not have to look at the grounds for impeachment in the Hlophe matter as the JSC had already done that.
Section 89 deals with the removal from office of a president, while section 194 deals with the removal of a head of a chapter 9 institution.
“With the different arms of government it’s always a check and balance [function] to make sure that though we have separation of powers, there is a balance in the exercise of responsibilities the constitution places on a certain arm of government.
“The National Assembly’s role here is therefore a check. It’s keeping that balance in these sequential roles as set out in section 177 of the constitution. It's the JSC, the National Assembly and then the president,” said Loots.
This did not mean the assembly should simply rubber stamp the JSC's process.
“Every decision, every vote the assembly takes should be rational.”
TimesLIVE
Parliament considers putting Hlophe impeachment back on the table
There is nothing stopping parliament dealing with the matter, the National Assembly’s programming committee heard
Image: BONGIWE GUMEDE
Parliament is considering putting suspended Western Cape judge president John Hlophe's impeachment back on the table.
Parliament put the matter in abeyance in September 2021 when Hlophe approached the Gauteng High Court seeking an interdict to stay the impending impeachment and his suspension by President Cyril Ramaphosa.
This was a month after the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) decided by a majority vote Hlophe was guilty of gross misconduct after a 2008 complaint by all the then justices of the Constitutional Court.
The ConCourt justices complained he had sought to influence the outcome of cases then pending before the court related to corruption charges against former president Jacob Zuma.
The JSC’s decision was sent to parliament, in terms of the constitution, to decide whether to impeach.
Hlophe was going to appeal the JSC finding but because of lack of funding he couldn’t file his record of appeal. He was suspended in December 2022 and his appeal [period] lapsed in January 2023.
After a push by DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube, the National Assembly’s programming committee heard on Thursday there was nothing stopping parliament dealing with the matter.
“We have checked with legal services and they advise there is no impediment and the matter could be dealt with,” said National Assembly secretary Masibulele Xaso.
“In 2021, when the matter served before this committee, because there were still appeals underway, this committee was of the view that this matter should be held in abeyance. So it’s this committee that should activate the process should it deem it appropriate.”
Gwarube said it was incumbent on the committee to revive the matter so the report can serve before the assembly and reach a decision.
“None of these appeals have materialised. It’s important that we take the decision to revive the matter so we can see it to its conclusion.”
She was supported by UDM chief whip Nqabayomzi Kwankwa, who said the matter needed to be finalised before the term of the sixth parliament ended. “We have a responsibility to act on it and act on it as soon as possible,” he said.
Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula said a decision on how to proceed would be taken at the committee’s meeting next Thursday.
A two-thirds majority vote is required to impeach.
Before putting the matter on hold in 2021, MPs were advised by parliament’s legal services that there was no need for the institution to hold another inquiry into Hlophe’s conduct, as its role is limited to a “check and balance” function.
Parliament legal adviser Barbara Loots said unlike a section 89 or 194 impeachment process, parliament does not have to look at the grounds for impeachment in the Hlophe matter as the JSC had already done that.
Section 89 deals with the removal from office of a president, while section 194 deals with the removal of a head of a chapter 9 institution.
“With the different arms of government it’s always a check and balance [function] to make sure that though we have separation of powers, there is a balance in the exercise of responsibilities the constitution places on a certain arm of government.
“The National Assembly’s role here is therefore a check. It’s keeping that balance in these sequential roles as set out in section 177 of the constitution. It's the JSC, the National Assembly and then the president,” said Loots.
This did not mean the assembly should simply rubber stamp the JSC's process.
“Every decision, every vote the assembly takes should be rational.”
TimesLIVE
MORE:
Judicial misconduct complaints system is ‘broken’: Freedom Under Law
'He said I should tell my client to f**k off’- Western Cape judge president John Hlophe in trouble again
LETTER | John Hlophe needs help
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.
Most read
Latest Videos