Western Cape High Court rules against Dr John Hlophe's appointment to Judicial Service Commission
The court's decision, handed down on Monday, underscores the imperative of judicial integrity and the constitutional responsibilities of South Africa's legislative body.
In a judgement that has reignited debates about the judiciary's independence, the High Court found that the National Assembly (NA) had failed to appropriately exercise its discretion when approving Hlophe's appointment, an oversight that effectively undermined the credibility of the JSC.
The court's order reflects a broad consensus that rigorous standards must be upheld in judicial appointments, especially for a body entrusted with safeguarding the country's constitutional commitment.
The implications of the ruling are profound, as the JSC is constitutionally mandated to recommend judicial appointments and hold judges accountable. The court stated that failing to act responsibly in Hlophe's nomination could jeopardise the very independence the JSC is supposed to protect.
Hlophe was nominated to the JSC last year but subsequently resigned amidst a flurry of controversy.
The court explicitly stated that "Dr. Mandlakayise John Hlophe may not be designated to serve on the Judicial Services Commission in terms of section 178(1)(h) of the Constitution," marking a rare judicial rebuke of a parliamentary appointment.
The judgment comes after a legal challenge by organisations including Freedom Under Law, Corruption Watch, and the Democratic Alliance (DA).
These groups argued that including an impeached judge in the JSC threatened the integrity and independence of South Africa's judiciary.
'The judiciary is essential to the maintenance of constitutional democracy,' they asserted, solidifying their stance against any attempts that could compromise its impartiality.
Dr Hlophe became South Africa's first judge to be impeached in its democratic era in February 2024, following charges stemming from a misconduct case dating back to 2008.
He faced serious allegations of attempting to improperly influence Constitutional Court Justices Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta in a matter concerning then-President Jacob Zuma.
After a protracted legal battle, the JSC finally recommended his removal in 2021, with Parliament voting in favour of impeachment only three years later.
In response to the court's ruling, DA federal chairperson Helen Zille stated, "The High Court order to bar an impeached judge from serving on the Judicial Services Commission is a victory for the rule of law and the Constitution."
She emphasised that the JSC must consist of members who are "fit and proper" and hold the public's confidence, reflecting the broader societal imperative for transparency and accountability within the judiciary.
This latest development stands as a testament to the ongoing efforts to reinforce the principles of lawful governance within South Africa, propelling the conversation about judicial integrity into the national spotlight once more.
DAILY NEWS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Mbeki and Mabandla seek to intervene in R167 million apartheid damages case
Former President Thabo Mbeki and erstwhile justice minister Brigitte Mabandla's application to intervene in an apartheid-era damages claim will be heard on Monday, July 28 by the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria. Image: DIRCO Former president Thabo Mbeki and ex-justice minister Brigitte Mabandla will on Monday ask to intervene in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria application for R167 million in constitutional damages by families of victims of apartheid-era atrocities. Mbeki and Mabandla have indicated that they want to intervene in the R167m constitutional damages case brought by survivors and victims of apartheid human rights violations to protect their reputations. Survivors and victims of apartheid-era atrocities and the Foundation for Human Rights (FHR) have asked the high court for R167m constitutional damages, which includes about R115.3m over five years, to enable families and organisations supporting them to advance truth, justice, and closure by assisting in pursuing investigations and research, inquests, private prosecutions, and related litigation. Another R8m over five years will enable families and organisations supporting them to play a monitoring role in respect of the work of the policing and justice authorities charged with investigating and prosecuting the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) cases referred to the National Prosecuting Authority. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading An additional R44m over 10 years is sought to enable families and organisations supporting families to pursue commemoration, memorialisation and public education activities around the TRC cases including the holding of public events, publishing of books, and making of documentaries. In their application, survivors and family members of victims also want the court to declare the failure and/or refusal by the president to establish a commission of inquiry into the suppression of the investigation and prosecution of the TRC cases inconsistent with his constitutional responsibilities under the Constitution and a violation of their rights to equality, dignity and the right to life and bodily integrity of the victims in terms of the Constitution. Responding to Mbeki and Mabandla's application to intervene, Lukhanyo Calata, the son of the late Fort Calata who, along with Matthew Goniwe, Sicelo Mhlauli, and Sparrow Mkonto, became known posthumously as the Cradock Four, said the former president and erstwhile minister have no direct and substantial interest in the main application, given that no relief is sought against them in their personal capacities. President Cyril Ramaphosa has since established a commission to be chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Sisi Khampepe to inquire into, make findings, report on and make recommendations on unlawful interference and collusion since 2003. The government maintains that there is no concrete allegation of interference in the families' case. Mbeki and Mabandla also state that the families make unfounded, false and damaging allegations of interference and collusion against them in their case. They also indicate that the facts of interference and collusion will be better addressed in the commission. According to Mbeki and Mabandla, they are seeking to intervene because the relief sought by the families and the consequent claim for constitutional damages are founded on serious allegations of unconstitutional, unlawful and criminal conduct by them (Mbeki and Mabandla) during the respective tenures, 1999-2008 and.2004-2008, respectively. "We have a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the proceedings," maintained Mbeki and Mabandla. They continued: "In the absence of our version, the only evidence before this honourable court is in the Calata applicants' founding affidavit. There is therefore a real risk that should we not be granted leave to intervene, the court will be presented with a one-sided narrative and the Calata applicants may be accepted as uncontested." Mbeki and Mabandla told the court they do not seek to intervene merely to set the record straight or out of concern that the court's findings may affect their reputations. "Rather, we seek leave to intervene because the relief sought by the Calata applicants is expressly predicated on allegations of unlawful conduct purportedly committed by us (and other state officials) during our tenure; allegations which we intend to dispute," they explained. The families oppose the application and argue that it is not possible to intervene simply to rebut adverse allegations and that the relief they seek is not directed against Mbeki or Mabandla but against the state. If Mbeki or Mabandla, the families say, feel they have been defamed they have recourse through normal legal remedies and that the application can be decided without the need to make findings in respect of individual role-players, the task of the commission set up by Ramaphosa, according to the FHR.
The South African
a day ago
- The South African
MK Party wants secret ballot for Ramaphosa no-confidence vote
The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party has requested that the Motion of No Confidence against President Cyril Ramaphosa be conducted via a secret ballot. The party's parliamentary leader, Dr John Hlophe, wrote a formal request to the Speaker of Parliament, Thoko Didiza. He believes that a secret ballot will ensure that Members of Parliament (MPs) can exercise their constitutional duty freely, without fear of intimidation. According to Hlophe, the request aligns with Rule 129 of the National Assembly Rules. Given the sensitive nature of the motion, the MK Party believes a secret ballot is necessary to protect the integrity of the process. Hlophe said the ballot must reflect principles of accountability and transparency, and protect MPs' freedom to vote according to their conscience. 'A secret ballot will safeguard the integrity of the voting process and ensure that the outcome reflects the true will of the MP,' said Hlophe. Hlophe further called on Speaker Didiza to consult with relevant stakeholders and to make an urgent decision on the matter. The MK Party filed the motion on Tuesday, 22 July. The party cited President Ramaphosa's dismissal of Police Minister Senzo Mchunu and the appointment of Acting Police Minister Firoz Cachalia as the basis for its action. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 11. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news
The South African
a day ago
- The South African
The Judicial Service Commission announces candidate shortlist
On 25 July 2025, the Judicial Service Commission announced the candidates that have been shortlisted for vacancies across various courts in South Africa. They will interview the selected candidates between 6 to 17 October 2025. The Constitutional Court, Supreme Court of Appeal, Land Court, Labour Court and multiple divisions of the High Court currently have open positions. 'The Constitutional Court advertised two vacancies. Six candidates have applied but only five of them are eligible to be shortlisted,' said the office of the JSC. According to the JSC, because they only had five qualifying candidates, the commission decided to re-advertise the positions. 'The advert was published on 18 July 2025, with a closing date of 6 August 2025,' they said. The commission further explained that the new applications will be narrowed down and will be sent as recommendations to the president. Despite the extension, the Constitutional Court applicants will also be interviewed in October. According to the JSC, the following candidates have been shortlisted to be interviewed in October for openings in the Supreme Court of Appeal: Judge Thandi Victoria Norman Judge Bashier Vally Judge Leonie Windell Judge Gerald Hercules Bloem Judge Busisiwe Shareen Masipa Judge Pitso Ephraim Molitsoane Although there are three vacancies open at the Johannesburg Labour Court, only one candidate, Suzanna Harvey, has made the cut. Nevertheless, law bodies and members of the public who wish to comment on the shortlisted candidates have been urged by the JSC to write to the commission's Secretariat. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
