Abstract

Judicial independence is fundamental to democracy. It is in that context that this paper considers whether the existing constitutional and legislative mechanisms provide sufficient judicial independence to South African judges. In so doing, the paper focuses on impartiality, judicial appointments and security of tenure. It also discusses the sensitive matter of complaints and disciplinary proceedings against judges and their removal from office. The issue of the remuneration of judges is also explored. In discussing the challenges facing judicial independence some incidents that have appeared to compromise such independence are highlighted. These include the controversial appointments of Advocate Mpshe as an acting judge in the North West Province in 2010 and Judge Heath as the Head of the Special Investigative Unit (SIU) in 2011. The never-ending controversy surrounding the Cape Judge President John Hlophe and his alleged attempts to improperly influence two Constitutional Court judges in a case involving President Jacob Zuma is also highlighted. Another issue that has brought judicial independence into sharp focus is the June 2015 visit to South Africa of Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir, who was on a warrant of arrest from the International Criminal Court (ICC) for genocide and war crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan. A decision by the North Gauteng High Court on his presence in South Africa and the attacks on the judiciary made by various government officials as a result are discussed. Several conclusions are drawn but in the main, it is generally concluded that the constitutional and legislative framework adopted by South Africa sufficiently insulates judges from improper influence. However, there have been several notable challenges that particularly relate to judicial appointments and how the JSC has handled certain matters. Irresponsible and uninformed political statements by politicians and unwarranted political attacks on the judiciary by government are also a source of great concern. These challenges could and should be construed as threats to judicial independence, and need to be comprehensively and properly addressed.

Highlights

  • L Siyo JC MubangiziThe principle of judicial independence is fundamental to democracy

  • Addressing the Cape Law Society a few weeks before his death, the former Chief Justice of the Republic of South Africa, Arthur Chaskalson, had this to say: Judicial independence is a requirement demanded by the Constitution, not in the personal interests of the judiciary, but in the public interest, for without that protection judges may not be, or be seen by the public to be, able to perform their duties without fear or favour.[3]

  • From the above considerations, the test to determine bias can be summarised as follows: a) there must be a reasonable apprehension, b) the reasonable apprehension ought to be held by an objective and well informed person, c) the apprehension must be that the judge will not be impartial in adjudicating the matter, and d) this apprehension must be made in the light of the oath of office taken by the judges.[15]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The principle of judicial independence is fundamental to democracy. As a result, it features quite prominently in many international legal instruments.[1]. This section prescribes that organs of state – through legislative and other measures – must assist and protect the courts in order to ensure their independence, impartiality, dignity, accessibility and effectiveness This is supported by and in the context of sections 165(2) and 165(3), which pertain to judicial authority and state that the courts are independent and subject only to the Constitution and the law, which they must apply impartially and without fear, favour or prejudice; and that no person or state organ may interfere with the functioning of the courts. Some challenges to judicial independence in South Africa – largely relating to impartiality and bias – are identified and discussed, and some conclusions are presented

Impartiality
Judicial appointments
21 Acting Chairperson
Security of tenure
The remuneration of judges
Challenges
Conclusion
Literature
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call