Judge tells City Power: You f****d up!

Joburg High Court Judge Kathy Satchwell. Photo: Sharon Seretlo

Joburg High Court Judge Kathy Satchwell. Photo: Sharon Seretlo

Published May 23, 2015

Share

 

Johannesburg - A Joburg High Court judge has launched a scathing attack on the City of Joburg and its power utility City Power, calling them “idiots” and accusing them of “f***ing up” over their reluctance to reveal information about a R800-million solar geyser deal.

In a Promotion of Access to Information case brought by Numsa, the metal workers union, against City Power, Judge Kathy Satchwell accused the utility’s officials of “covering up fraud and corruption” over its refusal to hand over documents relating to the contract on solar geyser heaters.

Judge Satchwell was unimpressed with City Power’s failure to respond to Numsa’s requests for information since 2013. She said that City Power had replaced the Road Accident Fund “in so far as incompetence and fraud is concerned”.

Lawyers representing City Power argued that the judge was “biased” after she had ordered that legal costs be paid by the utility’s officials responsible for the litigation out of their own pockets, and not the ratepayers’. The lawyers argued that Satchwell had used “profanities” in her chambers against the utility’s attorneys by calling them “idiots” and remarking that someone had “f***ed up”.

“Some person” within City Power, she remarked, was “lazy, covering up, hiding things, and idiots and the like” and the “knowledge of such things comes to one like a dagger in the night”.

“The learned judge stated that the City… only uses young incompetent black attorneys or little grey old white men sucking up to the black people in the city,” read the application by City Power’s lawyers.

City Power said that the judge had suggested that these attorneys were used in order to cover up fraud and corruption. “The learned judge stated that the city believes that it is a tail wagging the dog and that ‘I should decide whether or not I am going to allow this’.”

The utility’s lawyers said this was an indication of bias because the judge had not heard the merits of the case.

The utterances were apparently made in April in Judge Satchwell’s chambers when she granted an order of costs to Numsa.

At the heart of the matter is Numsa’s request for information on an R800-million contract for the supply and installation of solar geysers in 2012.

Numsa had sought the court’s intervention after its requests for information in August 2014 had been ignored.

The union previously alleged that the contract was awarded to companies that imported the geysers from China while the same were made in the East Rand. According to the recusal application by City Power, Judge Satchwell also stated that, by not disclosing the documents sought by Numsa, “You are being tarred by the tar of President (Jacob) Zuma. Go think about this”.

But on Friday Satchwell was unapologetic as she refused the application to recuse herself. She told the defence lawyers she was only prepared to amend patent errors in her judgement. The City Power attorney, she remarked, had tried to set her up but “I don’t care”.

City Power has people “who don’t know how to do their job. That sounds like incompetence – so my ‘bias’ remains”.

Satchwell added that profanities she was accused of using “would worry my mother but not my father”.

She said that her order for costs to be paid by officials of City Power was meant to “look to see if anybody has placed City Power in the dwang”.

“City Power might have been badly done by its staff,” she said. “Look to see if there should be any employees held responsible.” She dismissed the application for her recusal but the order for City Power to pay the legal costs remained.

Judge Satchwell instructed the attorneys to write to Sicelo Xulu, City Power’s managing director, to put his house in order. She said that City Power’s refusal to disclose information was made without reading the relevant provisions of the Promotion of Access to Information Act.

Judge Satchwell said City Power's information officer had refused Numsa’s request in 2013 and 2014 unprocedurally and without full information before him. The utility had been “contemptuous” to the court, she said. Judge Satchwell said Numsa may appeal the refusal through internal processes before turning to the court for assistance.

In 2001, Satchwell, a lesbian, won the right for her partner to enjoy the same benefits as those previously reserved for spouses of married heterosexual judges, a right confirmed by the Constitutional Court the following year.

Saturday Star

Related Topics: