Magistrate story not fair

THE article on the front page of the Sunday Times, “Magistrates: drunks, thieves and killers” (September 1) has been noted with grave concern. The disparaging contents of the report are misleading and unfair to the magistracy. They also are a harmful generalisation which is damaging to the image of the magistracy in particular and the judiciary in general and should be immediately corrected.

There are 1 915 magistrates in South Africa comprising both regional and district court magistrates. For the period 2006 to date, only seven magistrates have been implicated in criminal offences.

The statistics of complaints laid against magistrates are correctly stated in the article as 258 in 2012 and 222 as at August 30 2013. However, only 28 of these have necessitated formal investigations. There are currently nine magistrates charged with misconduct and their cases are still pending. The generalisation defies the principle that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

A total of eight magistrates have been removed from office emanating from misconduct hearings conducted during the period 2009 to 2013 — less than 1% of the total number of serving magistrates. This also goes to show how serious the institution is about rooting out undesirable elements from the court system. The magistracy should be lauded for taking decisive action against those elements rather than being projected as being generally corrupt, criminal and unfit for judicial office.

It should thus be clear that only a small number of complaints result in formal investigation and fewer result in formal charges of misconduct being instituted by the Magistrates’ Commission — the body tasked with the appointment of magistrates in the country. The bulk of the complaints against magistrates are directed at verdicts, sentences and orders delivered by magistrates with which the complainants were not content.

As regards criticism regarding persons not being fit for appointment, it should be noted that only a person with an appropriate legal qualification and at least seven years of post-university applicable legal experience is considered for appointment to entry-level positions in the magistracy. Applications for advertised posts are scrutinised intensively and, before being considered suitable for possible appointment, candidates have to comply with criteria such as integrity, work ethic, leadership and management skills, language proficiency and communication capability and commitment to transformation and development.

Barring the few isolated cases such as the ones referred to above, we can state without a shadow of doubt that magistrates conduct themselves in a manner that befits the office that they hold and that they uphold the values enshrined in the constitution. There is therefore no basis for the article’s misleading generalisation.— L Luti, spokeswoman for the Chief Justice