News

Judges acted lawfully in dealing with Hlophe

April 01, 2009 Edition 1

Sapa and Own Correspondent

BLOEMFONTEIN: The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) yesterday upheld an appeal by judges of the Constitutional Court relating to a dispute with Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe.

The appeal court replaced the high court order with an order dismissing Judge Hlophe's application.

The case relates to a complaint of judicial misconduct laid by the Constitutional Court judges against Judge Hlophe with the Judicial Service Commission on May 30, 2008.

They alleged Judge Hlophe had made inappropriate approaches to judges about a pending judgment on ANC president Jacob Zuma, who was facing graft charges.

Judge Hlophe laid a counter-complaint against the judges on June 10, 2008, and launched an application in the high court in Johannesburgburg for an order declaring, in essence, that the Constitutional Court had violated his constitutional rights by laying the complaint and by issuing a media release saying the complaint had been laid.

Yesterday's unanimous judgment by a panel of nine judges of the appeal court held the justices of the Constitutional Court did not act unlawfully when they made a complaint to the commission without first affording Judge Hlophe an opportunity to be heard, and that they did not act unlawfully by issuing the media statement.

The appeal court held that if the assertion against Judge Hlophe were true - a matter the appeal court was not called upon to decide - it was clearly to the public benefit that it should be known.

"The fact that the respondent is a judge does not give him special rights or special protection. Judges are ordinary citizens. They, too, like government, pressure groups, or other individuals, may not interfere in fact, or attempt to interfere, with the way in which a judge conducts his or her case and makes his or her decision." the judgment read.

It held that the remedies available in such a case were to insist upon a speedy disposal of the complaint to clear the judge's name and in appropriate cases an action for damages for defamation.

Meanwhile, South Africa's main newspapers have called for today's Judicial Service Commission hearing into the Hlophe matter to be open to the public.

Yesterday, four press groups, representing 31 newspapers, and the Freedom of Expression Institute filed an urgent application in the South Gauteng High Court, calling for the matter to be open.

Similar applications were brought by e.tv and the Centre for Applied Legal Studies.

The Judicial Service Commission opposed the applications, which were brought after the commission announced on Monday that today's hearing would be closed.