Ramaphosa won’t take act against Judge Hlope

Western Cape High Court Judge President (JP) John Hlophe. Picture: Ayanda Ndamane/African News Agency (ANA)

Western Cape High Court Judge President (JP) John Hlophe. Picture: Ayanda Ndamane/African News Agency (ANA)

Published Aug 2, 2022

Share

Cape Town - President Cyril Ramaphosa will not heed the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) recommendation to suspend Western Cape High Court Judge President (JP) John Hlophe any time soon.

A letter from the presidency’s acting head in Legal and Executive Services Unit, Geofrey Mphaphuli, said no decision would be taken despite the JSC making a recommendation for suspension during a special meeting last week.

“The President received the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) report on Wednesday, 27 July 2022. The President is aware of the ongoing court cases related to the issue. We advise further that the matter is receiving the necessary attention.

“The presidency is therefore not a position to make any decision, let alone make such an undertaking, at this time and on such notice,” the letter read.

This follows an announcement by the JSC last week that a suspension recommendation was made to the presidency after JP Hlophe was found guilty of gross misconduct when he had attempted to influence two justices of the court by trying to influence the outcome of former president Jacob Zuma’s corruption charges in 2008.

Through his legal team, JP Hlophe has since asked for the JSC to submit written reasons why the recommendation was made and relayed that he is contemplating applying to the court to have the resultant decision, if it would be followed, to be set aside on review.

Law expert Dr Paul Ngobeni said the President was being evasive and non-committal in the response.

“The merits of the JSC findings regarding JP Hlophe are currently being considered by the SCA. The Constitution does not envisage a suspension where the JSC'S decision is being challenged in court under these circumstances.

“(The JSC) acted out of retaliatory animus. They were willing to let the matter proceed before deputy JP (Roland) Sutherland who had shown remarkable hostility to Hlophe's legal counsel at the very beginning. The JSC only sought to react when JP Hlophe was granted leave to appeal to the SCA,” said Ngobeni.

Responding to further enquiries on the developments, JSC’s spokesperson, advocate Sesi Baloyi said: “No comment. Matter is now with the President to deal with as he determines.”

The Black Lawyers Association (BLA) meanwhile said that the decision by the JSC for their recommendation of suspension was “irrational and unlawful”.

In a statement, the BLA said they take the view that neither the recommendation of the JSC to recommend a suspension nor that of the President to effect the suspension is compelled by the relevant constitutional provision.

“Consequently, both the JSC and the President must make a careful appraisal of the relevant facts and consider possible threats to the administration of justice and the repute of the judiciary if a judge who is a subject of the section 177(1) process is not suspended. However, the President has no jurisdictional basis where the JSC has not made a recommendation.

“This matter has been widely covered in the media and has been a subject of biased media commentary for all these years. There is very little doubt that the length of time it has taken to finalise this matter and the domination of all commentary regarding this matter by people and organisations totally prejudiced against Judge President has delivered a great measure of unfairness to the Judge President.

“In view of the absence of any suggestion that the suspension is carried out in the interest of preserving some interest constitutionally deserving of protection, the recommendation for the suspension of the Judge President is irrational and unlawful. The President too in the exercise of his discretion, must consider the fact that he is faced with a unique situation in the history of the country and thus a decision to suspend the Judge President under the circumstances referred will be used as precedent in the future. The unique factual situation in the Hlophe matter makes suspension a rather unwarranted course of action,” the BLA said.

Cape Times