South Africa's Parliament Addresses Judicial Controversy - Cape Town Today
Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

South Africa’s Parliament Addresses Judicial Controversy

4 mins read
judicial controversy south african parliament

South Africa’s Parliament is standing by its decision to dismiss Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata, arguing that the current laws provide ample basis to proceed with their removal. The Parliament maintains that the Judicial Services Commission is the suitable body to make the necessary findings and that it is not within its jurisdiction to duplicate their work. The Parliament’s position serves as a reminder that democracy is a continuous process and maintaining the balance between the three branches of government is crucial.

South Africa’s Parliament argues that the current laws provide ample basis to proceed with the dismissal of Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata. The Parliament maintains that it does not lie within its jurisdiction to duplicate the work of the Judicial Services Commission, which is the suitable body to make the necessary findings. The Parliament’s position serves as a reminder that democracy is a continuous process and maintaining the equilibrium between the three branches of government is crucial.

A Stance That Resonates

South Africa’s parliamentary system has taken a stand that is causing stir in the judiciary. The issue at hand involves the potential dismissal of Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata. Recently, the Parliament made its case in the Western Cape High Court, arguing that the current laws are sufficient to continue the proceedings against these judges.

On 13th February, Judge Hlophe launched an urgent plea to the High Court, requesting a delay on the imminent vote for his dismissal, until his direct access to the Constitutional Court application is decided upon. Judge Hlophe’s argument rests on the belief that the National Assembly has not implemented the necessary rules for the dismissal of judges as outlined in Section 177 of the Constitution. He claims that this absence of rules breaches the legal and fair process required by the Constitution under Section 165. However, Parliament strongly rebuffs this claim, interpreting it as an effort to compromise the constitutional separation of powers and infringe upon judicial independence.

The Parliament’s Counter Argument

The Parliament argues that, far from being insufficient, the current general rules and practices of the National Assembly provide ample basis to proceed with the portfolio committee’s recommendation to dismiss the Judges. This argument is in alignment with its constitutional mandate under section 177(1)(b).

Additionally, the Parliament maintains that it does not lie within its constitutional or statutory jurisdiction to duplicate the work of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) by conducting another investigation into the conduct of Western Cape Judge President, Judge John Hlophe. The JSC, dominated by lawyers with the required expertise, is seen as the suitable body to make the necessary findings under Section 177(1)(a) of the Constitution. This standpoint was confirmed in the 2022 judgement of Hlophe v JSC and Others, where Judge Hlophe’s request for an investigation duplication was rejected.

The Implications of the Parliament’s Stand

The Parliament interprets Judge Hlophe’s appeal as an effort to obscure the separation of powers and modify the procedure into an appeal or review function. This would give the National Assembly the ability to override the JSC’s findings. The Parliament vehemently opposes this approach, as it diminishes the JSC’s central role and constitutional significance.

Both Judges Hlophe and Motata have been adjudged guilty of gross misconduct by the JSC, with Judge Hlophe’s case tracing back to 2008. He was charged by Constitutional Court Justices of trying to influence their judgement in the Thint/Zuma matters involving former President Jacob Zuma. Similarly, Retired Judge Motata was found guilty of drunk driving in 2009.

The Future of the Judicial Officers

The National Assembly has planned a meeting for 21st February 2024 to assess the report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services and to decide on the removal of the Judges from the registry of judicial officers.

The Parliament’s position and actions serve as a reminder that democracy is not a single event but a continuous process. It calls upon all South Africans to participate in this process by expressing their opinions in Parliament, in the provincial legislatures, and in the larger society. It reaffirms that the democratic process, while potentially challenging, is crucial to maintaining justice, transparency, and order in society. The strenuous efforts and dedication of the South African Parliament in handling these complex matters deserve commendation.

A Delicate Balance

As this story unfolds, it’s clear that the equilibrium between the three branches of government – legislative, executive, and judicial – is a delicate one. It demands ongoing vigilance and careful stewardship to sustain a functioning democracy. The Parliament’s resolution in this issue stands as a testament to its pledge to preserve this balance, even in the face of difficult circumstances.

1. What is the controversy surrounding the dismissal of Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata in South Africa’s Parliament?

South Africa’s Parliament is standing by its decision to dismiss Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata, arguing that the current laws provide ample basis to proceed with their removal. The Parliament maintains that the Judicial Services Commission is the suitable body to make the necessary findings and that it is not within its jurisdiction to duplicate their work.

2. What is Judge Hlophe’s argument in requesting a delay for his dismissal?

On 13th February, Judge Hlophe launched an urgent plea to the High Court, requesting a delay on the imminent vote for his dismissal, until his direct access to the Constitutional Court application is decided upon. Judge Hlophe’s argument rests on the belief that the National Assembly has not implemented the necessary rules for the dismissal of judges as outlined in Section 177 of the Constitution.

3. What is the Parliament’s counter-argument to Judge Hlophe’s claim?

The Parliament argues that, far from being insufficient, the current general rules and practices of the National Assembly provide ample basis to proceed with the portfolio committee’s recommendation to dismiss the Judges. Additionally, the Parliament maintains that it does not lie within its constitutional or statutory jurisdiction to duplicate the work of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) by conducting another investigation into the conduct of Western Cape Judge President, Judge John Hlophe.

4. What are the implications of the Parliament’s stand on the separation of powers and judicial independence?

The Parliament interprets Judge Hlophe’s appeal as an effort to obscure the separation of powers and modify the procedure into an appeal or review function. This would give the National Assembly the ability to override the JSC’s findings. The Parliament vehemently opposes this approach, as it diminishes the JSC’s central role and constitutional significance.

5. What is the future of the judicial officers in question?

The National Assembly has planned a meeting for 21st February 2024 to assess the report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services and to decide on the removal of the Judges from the registry of judicial officers.

6. What is the significance of the Parliament’s actions in this issue?

The Parliament’s position and actions serve as a reminder that democracy is not a single event but a continuous process. It calls upon all South Africans to participate in this process by expressing their opinions in Parliament, in the provincial legislatures, and in the larger society. It reaffirms that the democratic process, while potentially challenging, is crucial to maintaining justice, transparency, and order in society.

Previous Story

The Parliamentary Pulse: A Comprehensive Weekly Report

Next Story

Galaxy KDay 2024: A Music Spectacle under the South African Sun

Latest from Blog

The Rise of Vaping Among South African Teenagers

Vaping is quickly becoming a popular habit among South African teenagers, drawn by sweet fruity flavors, flashy packaging, and the buzz on social media. Many teens vape to fit in with friends, feel cool and rebellious, or to escape stress and anxiety. However, what seems like harmless fun can quickly turn into addiction, affecting their health and wellbeing. Despite the risks, vaping is often misunderstood, making it harder for families and schools to stop this growing trend. It’s a serious challenge that needs everyone—parents, teachers, and leaders—to work together to protect young people’s futures.

South African Agriculture and the Changing Winds of Trade

Since 2000, the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) has helped South African farmers sell fruits like avocados, wine, and citrus to the United States without paying extra taxes. This chance boosted farming communities, especially small farmers and women, by opening up new markets and encouraging growth. But recent U.S. tariffs threaten these gains, making it harder for farmers to compete and putting many livelihoods at risk. Still, South African farmers remain strong and hopeful, working hard to face these new challenges and keep their communities alive.

Trapped Abroad: Ashley Oosthuizen’s Journey Through Thailand’s Legal Labyrinth

Ashley Oosthuizen, a young South African woman, went to Thailand chasing her dreams but ended up trapped in a nightmare. After unknowingly signing for a package with illegal drugs, she was arrested and sentenced to over 13 years in prison, despite being innocent. Her mother moved to Thailand to fight for her, sharing Ashley’s story with the world and gaining support. Even when the real criminal confessed, the Thai courts kept Ashley behind bars. Her story is a powerful reminder of how quickly life can change and the risks travelers face in foreign countries.

Shadows Along the Hennops: Three SAPS Officers Vanish and a River Gives Up Its Secrets

In April 2025, three South African police officers disappeared during a trip and were later found dead near the Hennops River, along with two others. Their white car vanished into the river’s dark, swirling waters, hiding clues and sparking a deep mystery. Families and the public mourned, demanding answers amid fears of foul play. The quiet river, once peaceful, now holds heavy secrets and reminds the nation of the dangers police face and the urgent need for justice.

Cape Town’s Boatbuilding: Crafting a Legacy on the Waterfront

Cape Town’s boatbuilding industry is a shining example of skill and tradition mixed with new technology. It creates beautiful, strong boats that are loved worldwide and supports thousands of jobs in the city. But now, new tariffs on exports, especially to the US, threaten this important work and the people who depend on it. Despite these challenges, boatbuilders, city leaders, and innovators are coming together to protect this proud craft. Their passion and teamwork fuel hope that Cape Town’s boatbuilding legacy will sail on strong into the future.