The professional body representing advocates has come out in support of the statement made by acting chief justice Raymond Zondo criticising an opinion piece by tourism minister Lindiwe Sisulu as an “insult” to African judges.
In an article published almost a week ago Sisulu attacked the judiciary and the constitution and in particular those unidentified, “mentally colonised” African judges who had “settled with the world view and mindset of those who have dispossessed their ancestors”. She described some judges as slaves serving in their oppressors’ houses.
The General Council of the Bar of SA (GCB) said the minister’s “bold insults” against black judges are intolerable and called on President Cyril Ramaphosa to act decisively to defend the judiciary against the attack and any repetition of it by members of his cabinet. It also called on Sisulu to unreservedly withdraw her attack and issue a public apology.
“The GCB has on several occasions cautioned against ad hominem attacks on the judiciary, which have typically occurred in order to discredit adverse judicial rulings without offering any reasoned critique of the merits of the decision,” the council’s chair, Craig Watt-Pringle, said in a statement.
“The latest attack on unspecified black African judges in relation to unspecified rulings and decisions appears in the context of the opinion piece as calculated to undermine public confidence in the judiciary, and to intimidate black judges in particular from ruling against the perceived interests of particular political factions who purport to represent the interests of the indigent,” he said.
“It is an irresponsible subversion of our constitutional democracy for any person, let alone a senior member of parliament and member of the cabinet, to issue generalised, unsubstantiated insults against unnamed judges, thus preventing any meaningful debate or rebuttal.”
Watt-Pringle said to the best of the GCB’s knowledge, all current permanent judges were appointed after the inclusive process followed by the Judicial Service Commission. Furthermore, the laws that the courts interpreted and applied had either been made or tacitly endorsed by SA’s democratically elected parliament which had the power to amend any law. All law is subject to the constitution which both the judges and Sisulu have sworn to uphold.
“It is not open to judges to make arbitrary decisions according to any predilection they may have, as they are required to provide reasons and their judgments are subject to at least two tiers of appeal. Appeal courts are in turn constituted by a quorum of judges, which militates against individual judges being able to hand down judgments according to their peculiar political or socioeconomic views,” Watt-Pringle said.
“Therefore, in the absence of proper substantiation of the bold insults aimed at black judges by the minister, it would appear that the judiciary is being unfairly criticised for political advantage, in an effort to discredit the role of the judiciary in our constitutional democracy. This should not be tolerated.”
Watt-Pringle noted that confidence in the judiciary formed a cornerstone of SA’s democracy and of the rule of law.
“The timing of this unprovoked attack on the judiciary, shortly after submission of the first part of the state capture report, adds fuel to reports that it is ultimately the acting chief justice’s findings and recommendations of prosecution of individuals implicated in the state capture project, which is the target of the attack. Whether that is the case or not is strictly irrelevant, as the attack is broad enough to include acting chief justice Zondo in its ambit.”
Zondo said at a media briefing on Wednesday that judges accept that they could be criticised but this should be fair and have a proper factual basis. He insisted that he “had to” respond to Sisulu’s attack and did so after consulting fellow apex court justices and heads of court. “I found it to be completely unacceptable,” Zondo said.
In her article Sisulu — who is a possible challenger to Ramaphosa in the ANC leadership race in December and formally entered the 2022 race earlier in January — claimed SA’s uppermost judges “are only too happy to lick the spittle of those who falsely claim superiority” when “the language of the law has done little to really change anything”. She warned of the danger of “the mentally colonised African” who, as leaders or “interpreters of the law” proved “worse than your oppressor”.
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.