Judges respond to criticism of judiciary
CHIEF Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng must meet President Jacob Zuma to point out and discuss the dangers of “repeated and unfounded” criticism of the judiciary, South Africa’s senior judges decided yesterday.
The decision emerged at the extraordinary meeting of the heads of court countrywide and senior judges.
The meeting came in the wake of scathing criticism of judges, not only over several findings against Parliament and its rules, but also the controversial departure of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, despite a court order for him to stay.
Yet Bashir, who is sought by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and genocide, departed from the military Waterkloof Air Force Base as the North Gauteng High Court was still hearing the matter of his possible arrest as requested by the Southern African Litigation Centre.
“The rule of law is the cornerstone of our constitutional democracy. In simple terms it means everybody, whatever her or his status, is subject to and bound by the constitution and the law. As a nation, we ignore it at our peril,” Mogoeng said.
“The rule of law dictates that court orders should be obeyed. Our experience by and large is that court orders have been honoured by other arms of state. The few instances where court orders have not been complied with, whatever the reason, have the effect of undermining the rule of law.”
It’s not the only spate of criticism against judges. Over three years ago the judiciary was described as, among other, “counter-revolutionary” amid calls for closer scrutiny. In May 2012 then justice minister Jeff Radebe announced a review of court decisions in a move he argued was aimed at strengthening the judiciary, but which many observers described as a threat. The current status of the review is unclear.
Yesterday Mogoeng stressed judges did not act as a collective and any notion that judges prompt each other to arrive at pre-determined results must be rejected.
“Judges like others should be susceptible to constructive criticism. However… the criticism should be fair and in good faith. Importantly, the criticism should be specific and clear. General gratuitous criticism is unacceptable,” said the chief justice.
Judges are subject to peer review and anyone, from the public, litigants or aggrieved and interest parties, can refer matters to the judicial conduct committee of the Judicial Service Commission.
Mogoeng said “the constitution required the judiciary ultimately to determine the limits and regulate the exercise of public power”.
Mogoeng’s statements came as South African Communist Party (SACP) leader Blade Nzimande, also Higher Education minister, said the party would host a summit on the judiciary, which it said had overreached its mandate under the separation of powers with the legislature and executive, according to ANA.
Speaking at the SACP’s special congress, Nzimande said: “We are saying there has been a deliberate overreach by the judiciary. It can’t be the mandate of the judiciary to rule on matters of the executive… it is against the spirit of the separation of powers.”