Durban - The Durban magistrate who scolded a woman for wearing a “low-cut blouse” when she appeared before him had acted within his powers, a court ruled this week.
The female in question, Mary Govender, lodged a complaint with the Equality Court, against Magistrate Ismail Malek, and claimed that his view on her court attire in October was discriminatory.
Govender demanded an apology and R50 000 in damages from Malek because she believed that his rebuke was made openly, while the court was in session.
When Govender’s matter came before Magistrate Gert van Rooyen in June, Malek’s legal representative, advocate Joe Nxusani asked that the case be discharged and he made an absolution application.
Nxusani argued that Govender’s legal team had failed to raise a compelling argument and that Malek could not be sued because he was a judicial officer.
On Wednesday, Van Rooyen granted the application.
Govender, 49, who regards her dress sense as “glamorous with a little bit of sexy”, was not present in court when Van Rooyen delivered his decision.
The court was informed that Govender was serving a jail term at the Westville Prison.
Govender was found guilty on two counts of fraud, which related to tax evasion.
She was fined R30 000 or six months imprisonment, on the first count, and for the second count, Govender had the option of a R60 000 fine or a one year jail term. The presiding officer in that matter was Magistrate Trevor Levitt. The case began in 2010.
Levitt also handed Govender a further three years of imprisonment for her crimes, but they were suspended for five years on condition that she was not convicted on similar charges in that period.
However, Govender, who is known to wear trendy and expensive outfits from designers such as Calvin Klein, was unable to pay her fines in cash or even in instalments.
Govender encountered Malek when he stood in for Levitt on October 7 in the Durban Regional Court.
After that meeting, Govender initially lodged a complaint with the Regional Court president before seeking relief from the Equality Court.
She claimed in court documents that Malek regarded her manner of dress to be inappropriate and that it did not uphold courtroom decorum.
Govender claimed that Malek’s scolding and demand that she dress appropriately for court left her feeling as if she were a woman of “loose morals”.
“Archaic” and “patriarchal”, is how Govender described Malek’s views on her clothes.
By challenging Malek, Govender believed she was taking a stand for “sisterhood”.
Her fight with Malek got the attention of the Commission for Gender Equity, and the organisation assisted by providing Govender’s legal representation.
In responding documents, Malek denied that his comments had been demeaning, derogatory or sexist.
Malek also said he had not breached any professional ethics as a magistrate, and that his views on Govender’s attire were neither judgemental nor fundamentalist.
Sunday Tribune