By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Western Cape High Court has ruled that the impeached former judge, John Hlophe, cannot serve in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
Hlophe was nominated to serve on the JSC last year but subsequently resigned.
JSC is a South African body responsible for selecting and recommending candidates for judicial appointments, as well as addressing complaints against judges.
The legal action was brought by Freedom Under Law, Corruption Watch, and the Democratic Alliance (DA) who argued that appointing an impeached judge to the JSC threatened the independence and legitimacy of South Africa’s judiciary.
Hlophe became the first judge in democratic South Africa to be impeached by Parliament, following a recommendation by the JSC.
The impeachment stemmed from a misconduct case dating back to 2008 when Hlophe was accused of attempting to improperly influence the Constitutional Court Justices Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta in a matter involving then-President Jacob Zuma.
Since then, Hlophe has become a member of parliament for the MK party.
The High Court found that the National Assembly (NA) had failed to properly exercise its discretion in approving his appointment—thereby undermining the integrity of the judiciary.
The court held that Parliament’s conduct effectively rubber-stamped Hlophe’s nomination, disregarding the serious implications for the JSC’s credibility and constitutional mandate.
“The NA did not consider the relevant fact that Hlophe had been impeached for gross misconduct. Instead, it relied on irrelevant considerations, such as established parliamentary practices and conventions, which cannot override constitutional requirements,” the judgement read.
The court declared that the National Assembly may not designate Hlophe to serve on the JSC in terms of section 17 (1)(h) of the constitution.
In September last year, the same court granted an interim interdict barring Hlophe from participating in the October 2024 judicial appointment interviews.
The interdict stood until a final ruling was made on whether he was properly chosen to represent the National Assembly on the commission.
The court further said by Hlophe trying to appeal this judgment in the first part of this case, he’s shown disregard for the authority and integrity of the courts.
Hlophe has also been ordered to pay costs on a punitive scale for disparaging remarks he’s made about the litigants and the judges in this matter.