An isiZulu phrase was at the heart of the evidence heard on the first day of a tribunal looking into allegations that Western Cape judge president John Hlophe attempted to influence two Constitutional Court justices in cases relating to former president Jacob Zuma.
The Judicial Conduct Tribunal, the body that is probing the allegations and will submit a report to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), is looking into a complaint laid by the justices in 2008.
The tribunal finally got under way on Monday after multiple delays over the past 12 years.
Hlophe was at the time accused of trying to improperly influence retired justice Bess Nkabinde and justice Chris Jafta in a matter related to Zuma’s corruption case involving an arms deal in the 1990s.
The tribunal comprises retired high court judge Joop Labuschagne as president, appeal court judge Tati Makgoka and attorney Nishani Pather.
On Monday, the tribunal heard evidence from the first witness, an isiZulu language expert Langalibalele Felix Mathenjwa, on a phrase used by Hlophe in the impugned conversation with Jafta.
In a judgment setting aside a decision by the JSC to dismiss the complaint after a case was brought by Freedom Under Law, the Supreme Court of Appeal dealt with Jafta’s evidence provided in a hearing in April 2009.
Jafta’s evidence was that Hlophe had made an appointment to meet him in his chambers at the Constitutional Court at which the judge president raised the Zuma matters before the courts at the time.
According to the judgment, Hlophe, among other things, said that the matters had to be looked at properly because he believed that Zuma was being persecuted just as he (Hlophe) had been. In the conversation he used the phrase “sesithembele kina”, meaning “we pin our hopes on you” and understood by Jafta to mean “you are our last hope”, according to the appeal court judgment.
“Although he did not at the time think that Hlophe was trying to influence him, Jafta did think that Hlophe ‘was wishing for a decision which would favour Mr Zuma because the Supreme Court of Appeal had found against Mr Zuma and Thint’,” the appeal court judgment said.
Testifying on Monday, Mathenjwa said the phrase could be translated in many ways.
However, he said that his conclusion was that it was “not meant to influence anyone” and that Hlophe was only advancing “confidence, trust, faith, reliance and hope that Hlophe had in the person he was talking to”.
Mathenjwa raised on multiple occasions during his evidence that Jafta was not a first-language isiZulu speaker.
Thandi Norman, SC, who is acting for Jafta and Nkabinde, said the language expert pointed out that both Hlophe and Jafta understood the meaning of the phrase and it therefore made no difference that one of them was Zulu speaking and the other a Sotho speaker.
The tribunal will continue sitting on Tuesday. Jafta and Nkabinde are expected to testify.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.