Latest news with #GautengDivision
The Citizen
16-07-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
Wrap of Mbenenge tribunal: Judge awaits his fate
The tribunal will reconvene in October for oral arguments over sexual harassment claim. In perhaps one of the most contentious hearings against a judge, with witnesses contradicting each other, the Judicial Conduct Tribunal started the year with a hearing that seeks to determine whether Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge sexually harassed the secretary for the judges, Andiswa Mengo. The Tribunal, comprising Judge B M Ngoepe, retired Judge-President of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Tribunal President, and Judge C Pretorius, retired Judge of the Gauteng Division of the High Court and Advocate G Mashaba SC, as a non-judicial member of the Tribunal, commenced in January and is expected to resume again in October. Mengo's accusations Mengo lodged a complaint against Mbenenge, accusing him of sexual harassment after he allegedly persistently asked her to send him explicit images and also sent him his in exchange. In her testimony, Mengo told the Tribunal she found these requests for pictures 'annoying' and felt that he was forcing her to send them. She accused him of sexually harassing her through messages on WhatsApp, inappropriate comments, gestures regarding her appearance, and another incident that occurred in his chambers in November 2022. She also claimed he sent her an image of his penis, which was subsequently deleted on the evening of 17 June 2021. The complainant told the Tribunal it showed 'his private part with hair the same colour as his hair on his head'. He also allegedly sent her pornographic pictures. ALSO READ: 'How will Mbenenge defend himself?' Tribunal chair asks evidence leader during tense proceedings Mengo has accused the judge of asking her if she was aware of the effect she had on him as he pointed towards the front of his pants. She told the Tribunal that there was a bulge in his pants and that he was fiddling with his zip. 'He asked me if I didn't want to suck it,' she previously told the Tribunal. This incident is reported to have occurred on 14 November 2022, after he summoned her into his chambers at the Umtata High Court. Mbenenge's defence The judge has claimed that the sexual interactions between him and Mengo were consensual. Mengo, however, told the Tribunal that she reciprocated Mbenenge's sexual messages to 'satisfy him in order for peace at the workplace'. Mbenenge, the first senior judge in the country to risk impeachment for sexual misconduct, has also denied sending an image of his penis. 'In light of what you are saying, I am saying to you, the persistence in saying I sent K8 [penis] is crystal lies and in the direction of being malicious,' argued Mbenenge. He argued that he was trying to pursue a romantic relationship, but there was no clear guide on how to do so. Although he admitted to asking her to remove her jacket, he denied that the request was indecent. 'I wanted her to remove her jacket because I wanted to appreciate her appearance. It was obstructing my view of how she looked,' Mbenenge said, with hand gestures painting her figure. 'Reinforcement' The witnesses called to testify at the Tribunal muddied the matter, as some seemed to suggest that Mengo was a willing participant in the conversations, while others stated that she was not. In May, forensic and legal linguist Dr Zakeera Docrat testified that some of the emojis used by Mengo in her conversations with Mbenenge suggested 'agreement' and 'warmth'. ALSO READ: Did she mean it or not? Analysis of Mengo's WhatsApp messages to Judge Mbenenge questioned She testified that the exchanges between Mbenenge and Mengo started professionally but slowly degenerated with the use of emojis to 'convey sexual acts'. Mengo sent a 'monkey's closing its eyes' emoji. Docrat said this emoji represents 'reinforcement'. 'Reinforcement because she's used it more than once, even though there's no text. But based on the text chain that was unravelling, and in that instance, her shyness on her part, embarrassment.' 'Not much mutuality' In June, gender violence expert Dr Lisa Vetten testified that there was not much mutuality in the WhatsApp message exchanges between Mengo and Mbenenge. 'I looked at who initiated the conversation, how many conversations were sent by the Judge President, and by Mengo. I used that as an indication of who is initiating the conversation and who is more active in the conversation, and it gives you a sense of who is asking more often and engaging more often. It gives you an indication of who is the more interested party. I counted 837 WhatsApp messages, 526 from the Judge, and 311 from Mengo,' said Vetten. Eastern Cape High Court judge's secretary Andiswa Mengo gives testimony before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal. Picture: X / @OCJ_RSA Mengo's unclear responses, according to Vetten, were her way of evading Mbenenge's advances. Vetten said while Mbenenge used emojis to ask for things from Mengo, she used evasion to avoid direct responses to his advances. Did he send explicit images? Another witness, Dr Vincent Mello, in July questioned the format of some of the photos allegedly sent by Mbenenge to Mengo. He was asked to assess the usage of emojis and the disputed pictures allegedly exchanged between the two. Mello said some of the pictures were inconsistent with the WhatsApp format. 'Based on my analysis, it is clear that the photos are below the typing message area, and they depict as though the message was still being compiled, and possibly, it was a screenshot taken. A message that would have been sent would have had the ticks, but I didn't see them as I expected. The photos are not consistent with the WhatsApp template or indicate that they were sent,' said Mello. 'The photo [of Mbenenge's private part] cannot be confirmed if it was from WhatsApp since it is not consistent with the WhatsApp template or format. You don't see the name, followed by a typing space.' ALSO READ: Did Judge Mbenenge send Mengo explicit pictures? Expert testifies 'He does it to everyone' Another witness, Mbenenge's former secretary, Zinhle Nqkayi, in July, told the Tribunal Mbenenge used to comment on everyone's outfits at work, not just Mengo's. 'It was in the morning, I think around teatime. One of the judges' secretaries arrived in my office, and the JP [Mbenenge] was in his office at the time. The JP came out, and he stood by the door that interlinks our offices,' said Nqkayi. 'Mengo was passing by while the JP was having a conversation with Ms Gugushe, asking how she was. Mengo passed by and greeted me, and the JP called her, and she came into my office. The JP then uttered a statement, exclaimed and said, 'What is it, big girl? Why are you wearing a curtain today?' He then went further on to say, 'Do you see how other children are dressed well?' He was referring to Ms Gugushe and me as we were standing by my table.' ALSO READ: Mbenenge commented on everyone's outfits, not just Mengo's, says former secretary Advocate Griffiths Madonsela, for Mbenenge, asked Nqkayi: 'Was it usual for the judge to raise such issues?' 'Yes, that is his daily talk. Yes, he is like that; he would even pass this comment to a lawyer who would be coming into his office. The first thing he will notice is how that particular person is dressed, even with me; he will notice when I walk into the office and ask me, 'Haibo, big girl, are you awake? Why do you still seem to be dressed in your sleepwear?' Nkqayi responded. The Tribunal will reconvene on 21 and 22 October 2025 for oral arguments. After hearing all the evidence, the Tribunal will decide whether to recommend to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) that Mbenenge is guilty of gross misconduct.
The Citizen
09-07-2025
- The Citizen
FOLLOW-UP: State concludes its case against alleged Daveyton/Thembisa serial rapist
It has been nearly a year since the trial of alleged Daveyton and Thembisa serial rapist, Sipho Lucas Phiri, began in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, sitting at the Benoni Magistrate's Court. Today (July 9), State prosecutor Esther Kabini called her final two witnesses and rested her case. Phiri, a former Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa security guard, is expected to take the stand from July 14 to 18 to testify in his own defence. He stands accused of 44 counts of rape committed between 2018 and 2023 in Thembisa, Norkem Park, Daveyton and Putfontein. Additional charges include 43 counts of kidnapping, 41 of pointing a firearm, and 17 more that include fraud, the obstruction of justice, compelling someone to witness a sexual act, and contraventions of the Police and Firearms Control Acts. Since August 28, 2023, the State has called more than 60 witnesses, including complainants, an expert from the SAPS Forensic Science Laboratory in Pretoria, and the investigating officer, Detective Sergeant Kaizer Mbele of the Benoni Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offences Unit. The final witnesses to take the stand were five officers from the Daveyton, Norkem Park, Thembisa and Mara (Limpopo) police stations, who verified deponent statements collected from alleged victims at their respective police stations' Client Service Centres. Their testimony was called because the complainants refused to appear in court, having moved without informing the investigating officer of their current addresses. Two other complainants have died since filing their initial complaints. The proceedings were briefly adjourned after Advocate Marianne Mampuru, Phiri's defence attorney, raised concerns regarding the authenticity of a witness statement to be entered as evidence before Judge Rasigamani Bhika. Mampuru argued that the complainant had not initialled each page of the four-page statement. 'To my knowledge, legal documents should be initialled on every page to affirm the contents are accurate and correct,' she said. 'A full signature is required on the last commissioned page. I therefore feel this document cannot be entered as evidence.' Bhika referenced the national guidelines for taking statements from minors, which state that all pages of witness statements must be initialled. 'However, these are guidelines, and in this instance, an adult female made the statement. The statement will be accepted, and the weight of the content decided at a later stage.' Phiri will return to the dock on October 13. Three weeks were set aside for Mampuru to continue with her defence. ALSO READ: FOLLOW-UP: Forensic specialist and investigating officer take the stand in Phiri case ALSO READ: FOLLOW-UP: Trial against alleged serial rapist in recess At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
IOL News
22-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Gauteng high courts face crisis: Judicial Service Commission announces vacancies
The Gauteng division of the high court, Johannesburg and Pretoria, which are some of the busiest courts in the country, could see more judges appointed to this division later in the year. Image: Jacques Naude / Independent Newspapers While the Gauteng Division of the High Court (Pretoria and Johannesburg) is struggling to cope with the heavy workload, mainly due to too much work and too few judges, there may be light at the end of the tunnel as the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is looking to fill eight vacancies in this division. The JSC has called for nominations to fill these vacancies, as well as for candidates to apply for two vacancies in the Constitutional Court. It will also accept nominations of candidates to fill one vacancy in the Supreme Court of Appeal, one in the Land Court, as well as for three vacancies in the Johannesburg Labour Court. Two vacancies are open in the Mpumalanga division, while there is one vacancy open in the Free State and Limpopo divisions. The KwaZulu-Natal division has five vacancies available. Interviews of the shortlisted candidates are due to take place from October 6 to October 17. 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 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. Next Stay Close ✕ A Pretoria law firm, which has turned to the Constitutional Court for direct access in an urgent bid to overturn a directive introducing mandatory mediation in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, has, meanwhile, received the green light from the apex court that it will hear the matter. Since last month, the Johannesburg and Pretoria high courts no longer allocate trial dates for civil cases (cases where evidence is being led, such as damages claims). Litigants in these cases who want a judge to determine their issues must first prove that they have tried to resolve their issues via mediation. A trial date will be allocated only if mediation does not resolve the issues, and they can prove via a certificate that they did try it. The Office of the Chief Justice earlier explained that there are no alternatives as the Gauteng divisions cannot cope with the heavy workload. Gert Nel Inc Attorneys, through its director Gert Nel, however, questioned whether this move for mandatory mediation is constitutionally sound. Nel wants the Constitutional Court to look into whether there are constitutional limits on judicial power. He will argue that the directive amounts to the 'erosion of litigants' rights through unlawful judicial overreach'.
Daily Maverick
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Two Oceans Marathon chairperson squares off with blogger over ‘defamatory' articles
Two Oceans Marathon chairperson Toni Cavanagh has approached the high court on an urgent basis over what she alleges are defamatory and malicious articles written by blogger Stuart Mann. In the aftermath of last month's Two Oceans Marathon, in which the race organisers drew widespread criticism over multiple issues, the chairperson of the marathon, Toni Cavanagh, is dragging one of her loudest critics to court. Cavanagh has approached the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg on an urgent basis. She wants popular running blogger Stuart Mann to rescind claims that he has made on his platform over the last couple of months. In her affidavit, she said the articles written by Mann were defamatory and contained half-truths to suit a specific narrative, thus disrupting the operations of the Two Oceans Marathon board. She said her health had suffered since Mann zeroed in on her. On his blog, The Running Mann, Mann wrote articles in which he alleged that Cavanagh (who was elected as Two Oceans chairperson in October 2024) did not attain the position in an honest manner. Mann's allegations included the Two Oceans chairperson lying about her running credentials, as well as embellishing her professional CV. In one of his articles, Mann labelled this year's Two Oceans 'the worst organised' edition of the marathon. As a direct consequence of accepting more runners than were permitted for the 2025 event, the Two Oceans organisers did not have enough medals to distribute after the race. Participants also bemoaned the limited number of water tables along the route. Some runners complained of the distance between the tables, which they said were often overcrowded. Mann also highlighted these issues on his platform, with Cavanagh acknowledging to Daily Maverick that she and her colleagues could have done a better job. Reputational damage Nevertheless, she said the issues had been blown out of proportion. In her affidavit, she contended that Mann fuelled this furore with his publications. 'This application arises from a series of allegedly defamatory publications authored by the respondent, Stuart Mann, a blogger operating under the alias 'The Running Mann', which the applicants contend constitute a sustained campaign of reputational harm, harassment and character assassination,' she said. 'The publications falsely impugn the first applicant's personal and professional integrity, question the legitimacy of her leadership and cast aspersions on the governance and ethical standing of the Two Oceans Marathon. 'The applicants submit that the publications violate constitutional rights to dignity and psychological integrity, have caused measurable reputational and medical harm and jeopardise the credibility and sponsorship viability of the Two Oceans.' Cavanagh is asking the court to force Mann to retract and delete his article, and to issue a public apology in the form of a media statement. The Two Oceans boss also wants Mann to stop writing about her and has asked for an interdict to be granted to this end. Not backing down Mann, though, is not backing down and argued that he did not set out to humiliate Cavanagh, but aimed to use his powerful platform to hold Cavanagh and her colleagues accountable for their shortcomings. In his affidavit, Mann highlighted the injustices within the running community that he has exposed over the years. This includes him breaking the story of Steven Swarts earlier this year. Swarts was the Athletics Free State president despite being a convicted sex offender serving a suspended sentence. Mann's writing led to Swarts being removed from his post by Athletics South Africa. Mann said he had nothing to gain by aimlessly picking on Cavanagh, but wished to preserve the prestige of the Two Oceans Marathon and extend its lifespan. 'I deny that any statements or comments in the articles were defamatory, but are indeed truthful and in the public interest. [They] represent fair comment and criticism,' he said. 'Any attempt by the first applicant to paint me as a sexist is completely unfounded and I submit (with utmost respect) done in an effort to gain sympathy from the court.' Mann also said whatever criticism Cavanagh and her colleagues had been subjected to was by virtue of their own incompetence. He used the permit breach saga, which cost the Two Oceans Marathon its sponsorship from the City of Cape Town, as an example. 'I am not sure how I can be blamed for this. The City of Cape Town has, on its own accord and completely separate to any of my articles, shown distrust in the second applicant's leadership as a result of the permit scandal,' Mann said of Cavanagh. The court case will be heard on Tuesday, 13 May. DM
Daily Maverick
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
High court hears DA's case against employment equity amendment in critical examination of transformation
The DA's case against Labour Minister Nomakhosazana Meth and the Employment Equity Amendment Act is under way in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, with the DA opening the door for the entire bill to be declared invalid. 'Leave good enough alone.' This was the Democratic Alliance's (DA) argument in the Gauteng Division of the High Court on Tuesday, 6 May 2025, as the party challenged the constitutionality of the new draft employment equity targets proposed in the recently gazetted Employment Equity Amendment Act. The courtroom was filled with members of the public, including prominent individuals like DA MP Willie Aucamp and Cosatu Secretary-General Solly Phetoe. The DA's legal representative, Ismail Jamie, told the court that the previous iteration of the Employment Equity Act struck an appropriate balance between fostering transformation and protecting the rights of undesignated groups in that it was flexible, prohibited quotas, and gave employers the power to set their own targets based on their specific circumstances. Jamie argued that the amended act violated Section 9 of the Constitution because it 'replaces a nuanced, flexible system with one that is blunt and rigid'. In April, the Department of Employment and Labour gazetted the amendment act, which introduced five-year numerical targets for the top four occupational levels (junior, middle, senior and top management) across 18 sectors, ranging from finance to manufacturing. 'Rights violated' While the party's main argument was that Section 15a of the amended act violated the rights of coloureds, Indians and white people, another key argument was that the draft law was tagged incorrectly, therefore making it invalid. Jamie argued that the amendment bill was passed under Section 75 (which excluded provinces) of the Constitution instead of Section 76 (which governs legislation on a national level). Section 76 governs how bills affecting provinces must be passed, and its focus was to ensure that provincial interests were considered. The party's representative maintained that if the court found that Section 15A of the amended act was indeed invalid because it had been tagged incorrectly, then a natural consequence of the finding would be that the entire amended act be deemed invalid on a technicality. The DA also claims that: Section 15A violates Section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race. The minister's discretion under Section 15a lacks clear legal standards, contravening the Dawood principle of administrative law. The implementation of demographic targets disproportionately prejudices coloured and Indian communities in certain provinces, particularly the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. Exemptions for small businesses and the government's settlement in the Solidarity case suggest an acknowledgement of the potential economic harm of the quotas. Drama unfolds While the proceedings were relatively calm, they were unceremoniously interrupted by two unidentified individuals, who said that they were aggrieved parties who deserved to submit to the court. In a dramatic turn, the men told the judge that they would consider the case a mistrial if the judge refused to hear them, as Parliament had ignored their interests when drafting a law that worked against their interests. The judge refused to hear them and summarily dismissed the pair. The case is ongoing with the Department of Employment and Labour's representatives presenting the State's argument. DM
