Cape Town — The interdict against the impeached judge and uMkhonto weSizwe Deputy President, John Hlophe, to serve on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is subject to a review application.
The Western Cape High Court ruled that Hlophe may not serve on the JSC for the interview process after the Democratic Alliance (DA) was successful in its interdict to prevent Hlophe from taking part in any JSC processes.
According to SABC News, Hlophe’s interdiction is dependent on a review by the National Assembly (NA) to designate him to the body. The MK Party launched an application three weeks back as it described the court judgement as a major step in safeguarding the independence of the country’s judicial system.
The court found that the NA rubberstamped Hlophe’s designation and failed to exercise its constitutional discretion. It also found that the NA committed an error of law and its decision was unreasonable and irrational.
Parliament’s consistently maintained that it will abide by the court’s decision.
The Western Cape High Court has ruled that John Hlophe is prohibited from attending the upcoming Judicial Service Commission (JSC) meeting scheduled for October, pending a review of his designation as a Parliamentary representative on the JSC. https://t.co/2qMMcfVZ4z
— THE TRUTH PANTHER (@TheTruthPanther) September 27, 2024
Meanwhile, ActionSA also said it would refer Hlophe’s matter to Parliament’s Constitutional Review Committee as the party believes it underscores the urgent need for constitutional reforms to clarify the contradictions in eligibility criteria for public office.
ActionSA believes that the argument questioning Hlophe’s fitness to serve on the JSC shows a unique challenge and constitutional blind spot. This is despite the fact that Hlophe was elected as an MP for the MK Party, a position that meets the requirements as per Section 47 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.
“This contention reveals a potential contradiction in the eligibility criteria for public office. On one hand, his election to Parliament signifies a recognition of his competence and ability to represent South Africans, while on the other hand, the claim that he is unfit for the JSC—a deployment by the very house to which he was duly elected—raises questions about whether the standards for these two roles are misaligned, as we believe the judgment suggests,” ActionSA’s Lerato Ngobeni said.
ActionSA argued that if Hlophe was deemed fit to serve as a leader of the opposition party, it raised the question of why the prevailing standards would not apply to the JSC and other committees that Hlophe serves on.
The party believes the inconsistency underscores the need for more consistent and transparent criteria to safeguard the integrity of Parliament and the JSC.
“ActionSA will therefore refer this matter to the Constitutional Review Committee to initiate a review process of applicable legislation, rules, and frameworks to seek to clarify this contradiction and ensure that eligibility standards for public office are consistent, transparent and uphold the integrity of both Parliament and the Judicial Service Commission in this particular case, “Ngobeni concluded.
“ActionSA will refer the John Hlophe matter to Parliament’s Constitutional Review Committee following the interdict preventing his appointment to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).https://t.co/cSGwzjIXMB
We believe this underscores the urgent need for constitutional…
— ActionSA (@Action4SA) September 27, 2024
Follow African Insider on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram
Picture: X/@MxolisiThango
For more African news, visit Africaninsider.com
Compiled by Matthew Petersen
