By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
@GalloImages.
Retired judge Nkola Motata’s conduct after a drunk driving incident and his subsequent arrest justified impeachment proceedings to begin in parliament.
That was the majority finding in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on Thursday, 16 years after Motata drove drunk into a house and was later arrested and convicted. A minority on the SCA said the matter should instead be sent back to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) for reconsideration.
The SCA ruled that JSC must submit its finding that Judge Motata is guilty of gross misconduct to National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula.
A month ago, the JSC had defended its decision to find Motata guilty of misconduct instead of gross misconduct.
But Freedom Under Law, a public interest organisation, approached the SCA in Bloemfontein with an application to review the commission’s decision.
This was after it lost its initial case in the High Court, arguing that the JSC must uphold the initial decision by the Judicial Conduct Tribunal, which had found him guilty of gross misconduct.
The implication would be that he forfeits his retirement benefit, which includes a salary for the remainder of his life.
In January 2007, Motata attempted to make a U-turn in his car in Johannesburg and reversed into the boundary wall of a residential property owned by Richard Baird.
Baird arrived at the scene and contacted the police.
During the incident, Motata became involved in a verbal altercation with Baird, who recorded some of the events as they unfolded.
The JSC later received three complaints against Motata, which were referred to the Judicial Conduct Tribunal of the JSC.
The case before the SCA was whether his conduct rendered him incapable of performing the duties of his office.
The tribunal found that Motata was intoxicated during the incident and was guilty of racist conduct.
The tribunal concluded that Motata’s conduct constituted gross misconduct.
However, the JSC rejected the tribunal’s recommendation, and instead, it imposed an R1.5-million fine on him to be paid to the South African Judicial Education Institute.
On Thursday, the SCA held that the high court, like the JSC, had also failed to consider the impact of Motata’s conduct on “the public confidence in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary and that on all of the evidence, there was no alternative to removal”.
The dissenting judges agreed with the reasoning and findings of the majority judgment but asked that the matter be remitted to the JSC for reconsideration.