More than 15 years ago, John Hlophe, the former judge president of the Western Cape bench, was accused of trying — and failing — to improperly influence two judges of the Constitutional Court in a matter involving then ANC president Jacob Zuma.
Like Zuma, who would become president of the republic in 2009, Hlophe used every trick in the book to delay his case being investigated and adjudicated. Last year, however, the judicial conduct tribunal found him guilty of improper conduct and recommended his impeachment.
In April, 305 MPs voted to impeach him, making him the first judge and judge president to be dishonourably discharged from service. Hlophe is still challenging his impeachment.
Last Friday, Hlophe, who boasts high intellect, oratory skills and an Oxbridge education, recorded another first in his controversial career. Without openly campaigning in last month’s general election, he was confirmed as the parliamentary leader of Zuma’s uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party.
In effect, he replaces both Zuma and Jabulani Khumalo, the ousted leader of MK, as leader of the party in parliament. Zuma cannot stand as an MP thanks to his criminal conviction in 2021.
It puts Hlophe in line to be the leader of the official opposition and, possibly, a member of the Judicial Services Commission, the body that interviews and recommends judges for appointment by the president.
In weekend media interviews, Hlophe denounced the planned government of national unity (GNU), boasting about how he persuaded Zuma to urge his MPs to take up their seats in parliament today.
Hlophe is one of the best recruits by MK but his being favoured ahead of those who campaigned is likely to cause resentment among the faithful of the new party.
His entry into politics raises a number of troubling questions about our institutions.
Hlophe is one of the best recruits by MK but his being favoured ahead of those who campaigned is likely to cause resentment among the faithful of the new party
Most probably, there is nothing illegal about a former judge, especially one no longer in service and enjoying a salary for life, becoming an MP or leader of a party. But the optics of this whole saga are worrying. The tribunal found that his conduct seriously threatened and interfered with the independence, impartiality, dignity and effectiveness of the apex court. It also undermined the public’s confidence in the judicial system.
These damning comments might not worry the MK. After all, this is the party that believes our constitution should be shredded and traditional leaders should run the nation’s affairs.
However, the tribunal’s remarks should worry fellow MPs. Among the many questions they should ask are: when exactly did Hlophe buy into MK’s philosophy (prior or after his impeachment); has Hlophe always believed the constitution was an irritant worthy to be binned; and, apart from his intellect, how did he make it to the bench and judge presidency with such views?
This also calls into question the many judgments he delivered during his tenure. Were all these based purely on law and its interpretation? Famously, Hlophe acquitted Bongani Bongo, a former ANC MP and intelligence minister in Zuma’s administration, of corruption charges.
Even more concerning, of course, is the length of time it took for the system to finally eject him. Fifteen years is a long time to deal with a charge as serious as the one that Hlophe faced. We could do better.
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.