Chief justice Mandisa Maya told the Legal Practice Council (LPC) she found it “utterly disrespectful and patronising” that it used her name in charges against senior counsel Dali Mpofu without informing her.
After a hearing of a disciplinary committee of the LPC was postponed on Wednesday, its chairperson, adv Daniel Mpanza, briefed the media and said that three of the seven charges against Mpofu had been dropped from the charge sheet, one of which concerned Maya. He said Maya no longer wished to proceed, adding in response to a question, that she had indicated “that it affects her and all those things ... it’s personal”.
Maya told TimesLIVE Premium this was a “total mischaracterisation” of what she had said to the LPC. “One wonders if it was just a poor choice of words or deliberate.”
The charges that were originally brought by LPC, the legal profession’s regulator, came as a result of “several complaints”, according to the charge sheet. One of these was made by the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (Casac) in 2023 and included that Mpofu had behaved unprofessionally towards women colleagues.
The arrogance of the men-led Casac and the Legal Practice Council, to arrogate upon themselves the right to be offended on my behalf and on behalf of women generally, without so much as a word to these women, is breathtaking and feels to me very much like gross patriarchy cloaked in false chivalry
— Chief justice Mandisa Maya
One of the incidents specified by Casac in its complaint was a remark by Mpofu during Maya’s February 2022 Judicial Service Commission interview. He said that the two had spent “nights together” and then clarified, on a prompt by Maya, that he was talking about late night study sessions when they served pupillage at the Johannesburg Bar.
The LPC charge against Mpofu, which has now been dropped, was that Mpofu’s remark “failed to uphold the principles of our constitution, as this remark was discriminatory and laden with inappropriate sexual innuendo, which was offensive, unprofessional and lacking decorum”.
Maya told TimesLIVE Premium: “The arrogance of the men-led Casac and the Legal Practice Council to arrogate upon themselves the right to be offended on my behalf and on behalf of women generally, without so much as a word to these women, is breathtaking and feels to me very much like gross patriarchy cloaked in false chivalry.”
Mpanza’s explanation to the media on Wednesday “heightens this feeling and makes it extremely doubtful that the charge was ever brought in defence of women’s honour,” said Maya.
TimesLIVE Premium tried to reach Mpanza through the LPC but was unable to do so by the time of publication. Any comment received will be added to this article.
In a letter to the LPC on April 22, Maya said she found it “thoroughly baffling that the Legal Practice Council has launched these proceedings, partially in my name ... a whole three years after the fact, without affording me the basic courtesy of informing me”.
She had not lodged a complaint against Mpofu, she said. The LPC’s using her name in this way was “utterly disrespectful and patronising”.
“It tarnishes my reputation, undermines the integrity of the institution I serve — the judiciary — and hurts my family to have my name bandied about on media platforms in what now seems to be a sordid, sex-laced scandal, as no context is provided in the public discourse,” she said.
She told the LPC she had no wish to be involved in the proceedings and “trust that the Legal Practice Council will withdraw my name from its charge sheet”.
Responding in a letter a day later, the LPC's Gauteng director, Ignatius Briel, said that, as the regulatory body for the legal profession, the LPC was “required to investigate all complaints made against legal practitioners”. Though Maya did not submit a complaint, one was received from Casac.
“It is not our practice to ask sitting judges for comments on complaints, as we are concerned that doing so may compromise the judiciary in the exercise of its duties,” said Briel. However, the LPC would be reconsidering this approach after Maya’s complaint, he said.
“We will remove any reference to you in the charges, and no evidence will be led relating to your JSC interview,” said Briel in his letter.
The other two charges that were dropped related to Mpofu’s cross-examination of former public protector Thuli Madonsela during the parliamentary inquiry into the impeachment of her successor, Busisiwe Mkhwebane. Madonsela also did not want to proceed, said Mpanza on Wednesday.
On April 14, News24 reported that Madonsela wanted no part in the proceedings. Madonsela is quoted as saying that, while she understood the LPC had a duty to ensure discipline in the legal profession, this could be done without involving her.
She said the organisations that had complained about Mpofu’s cross-examination of her should have engaged with her “in acknowledgment of my agency, given that I am not a child, an imbecile, disabled or comatose person,” reported News24.
Casac’s Lawson Naidoo said Casac’s complaint was prompted by “a pattern of conduct” on Mpofu’s part — “especially towards female colleagues and judges, which fell below the standards required of a legal practitioner. And all this information was in the public domain ... it was all publicly available information, so we did not believe there was a need to consult any of the parties involved,” said Naidoo.
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.