Drunk judge to pay R1m for misconduct

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC), headed by Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, has given “racist” and “grossly incompetent” retired Judge Nkola John Motata a reprieve from the spectre of impeachment by pronouncing him guilty of misconduct, and not gross misconduct.

Mogoeng stated that Motata’s conduct – which led to his conviction and sentence by the criminal court – amounted to misconduct.

”More specifically, the majority of the JSC found that the racially loaded utterances made by Judge Motata were unbecoming of a judge, notwithstanding the majority’s acceptance that his responsibility was diminished by his proven intoxication and provocation of the alleged use of the k-word by the owner of the house [Richard Baird],” his statement read.

“In the result, Judge Motata is found guilty of the lesser offence of misconduct and not gross misconduct.”

He now has 24 months to pay a fine of R1 152 650,40, as from yesterday – the date of the statement.

The JSC also took issue with how its own member Advocate Izak Smuts – as an alleged instigator of the complaint against Motata – had chaired the deliberations over Motata and not disclosed his involvement and recuse himself.

Baird said he felt sick to his stomach and said it was yet another slur against him.

“This does not end here; I will not rest until I am cleared. The JSC is supporting a false claim of racism and it cannot be sustained,” Baird said.

He was referring to Motata’s allegation that Baird used the k-word, which he denies. “The judgment is appalling in its naked attempt to assist Motata. I was not racist, and there was absolutely no proof presented that I was.”

Motata’s “dishonest defence” as he put it, was one of the most frustrating factors. “At a stage of my cross examination, the defence asserted that ‘if Judge Motata was to give evidence, he would state that he was not drunk’,” he said.

“This was a false statement made, knowing it to be false and which was not corrected by Motata at any stage during the very lengthy drunk driving trial. It was made with the intent to mislead the trial court.

“Such unethical behaviour, so lacking in truthfulness and integrity, is gross misconduct for an officer of the court, and even worse for a Judicial Officer.

“It does not surprise me as Motata has been assisted every step of the way due to his affiliation and recently the composition of the JSC was questioned for good reason... His peers on the tribunal found his conduct to constitute gross misconduct and that’s all that matters.”