Opinion

JSC’s performance has left its reputation in tatters

The Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) performance last week has left its reputation in tatters.

Freedom Under Law has little to add to the resultant chorus of well-directed criticism, not only of the meeting but of the composition of the body. We do, however, want to draw attention to a particular feature of the proceedings as a whole.

The meeting was held for a special purpose. The constitution requires the president to consult the JSC when considering the appointment of the chief justice.

President Cyril Ramaphosa accordingly consulted the JSC as to the fitness for that office of four senior judges. That the JSC then conducted a four-day public embarrassment is regrettable (though hardly surprising). What was indeed surprising was the deft manipulation of the whole process, principally by the two members about whose
participation Freedom Under Law had cautioned at the outset.

ALSO READ: Lamola’s office criticises ‘disingenuous’ claims on Mlambo’s ConCourt appointment

Warning lights flickered soon enough, when Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga was asked, wholly irrelevantly to his own fitness for appointment, to comment on the propriety of his colleague Justice Raymond Zondo’s conduct in convening a media conference in response to a minister’s remarks about the judiciary – thus seeking to discredit Zondo in advance of his own interview.

A calculated strategy became evident when manifestly friendly and supportive questions were addressed to Justice Mandisa Maya and, in stark contrast, Judge Dunstan Mlambo was grilled so crudely that the chair admonished Julius Malema for his aggressive manner and tone. It became all the more plain that Maya was the favoured candidate and two strong contenders had to be knocked out.

These two were skilfully ambushed: Mlambo with a scurrilous and baseless rumour of sexual misconduct and Zondo with an equally baseless allegation of improperly meeting with the executive. The character assassins must
have known such confrontation was unethical. Certainly advocate Dali Mpofu, a seasoned practitioner, knows it is unethical to put defamatory accusations to a witness without a sound basis.

ALSO READ: JSC to recommend Judge Mandisa Maya for Chief Justice post

Confronting Mlambo, and later trying to revive the topic after it had been ruled out by the chair, was a deliberate and persistent smear. Consistently, Malema, with no substantiation, confronted Zondo with a suggestion that he
had somehow acted improperly some years ago when he met with then president Jacob Zuma after his appointment to head the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture. The questioning was hostile and the implication
was impropriety on the part of the judge.

With these two effectively nobbled and the JSC having decided their mandate was to pre-empt the president’s constitutional prerogative, Maya was nominated and her nomination hurriedly broadcast – there and then – without the elementary courtesy of first notifying the president.

Nonetheless, we are confident the president will not succumb to the contrived pressure and will make his own choice from among the four candidates – assured that each of them is eligible for the high office of chief justice.