In a landmark decision, South Africa’s parliament has impeached one of the country’s prominent judges for misconduct.
An investigation revealed that John Hlophe, the chief judge in Western Cape province, attempted to sway justices at the nation’s highest court in a case involving former President Jacob Zuma. In 2008, he approached two justices to gauge their support for Mr. Zuma in a corruption case.
Despite Mr. Hlophe’s persistent denial of the allegations, the lengthy process of appeals and investigations contributed to the significant delay between the alleged offence and his impeachment.
This removal of a judge marks an unprecedented event since the inception of South Africa’s democratic era in 1994.
Additionally, a second judge, Nkola Motata, faced impeachment for disorderly conduct and racial remarks stemming from a 2007 drunk-driving incident. Mr. Motata, now retired, served as a High Court judge in Gauteng province at the time of the incident and also refuted the accusations.
President Cyril Ramaphosa is now tasked with approving the decision and determining a date for the formal removal of the judges.
Upon their removal, the judges will forfeit all benefits, including a lifetime monthly salary exceeding 1 million rand ($53,000; £42,000), a car allowance, and comprehensive medical coverage.
Mr. Hlophe’s impeachment was the first to occur on Wednesday evening, with MPs voting by the required two-thirds majority. The decision garnered support from the ruling African National Congress (ANC), the main opposition Democratic Alliance (DA), and other minor parties.
Despite a last-minute attempt by Mr. Hlophe to halt his potential removal, which was rejected by a court just hours earlier, his impeachment proceeded swiftly, followed by that of Mr. Motata.
An investigation conducted by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) found that in 2008, Mr. Hlophe had contacted two of the eleven judges of the Constitutional Court in an effort to influence a ruling in favor of Mr. Zuma regarding a matter related to his arms-deal corruption case.
It’s important to note that Mr. Zuma has denied the corruption allegations, and there is no indication that he was involved in Mr. Hlophe’s actions.
Neither of the impeached judges has responded to the MPs’ decisions, but Mr. Hlophe had argued in court documents that parliament’s role was not merely to endorse findings by the JSC but to conduct its own investigation.
ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula said the party welcomed parliament’s decision, while the DA’s Glynnis Breytenbach said her party felt vindicated after “years of the ANC government dragging its feet” on the judges’ removal.
“We may have waited 15 years for this moment, but the impeachment of Judge Hlophe, or any judge, has profound implications for judicial integrity in South Africa. It underscores the importance of upholding the highest ethical standards, the rule of law, and the constitution among judicial officers.
“It also sends a clear message that no one, regardless of their position or influence, is above the law,” Ms Breytenbach said.
Opposition party, the Economic Freedom Fighters, voted against the impeachments, with MP Busisiwe Mkhwebane arguing that the judges were remorseful and should be allowed to live the rest of their lives in peace.
“Can we let Judge Motata, in his misjudgement, be left to enjoy his retirement at home. We know that Hlophe was highly qualified and did his work with dignity. Punish this ANC government,” she told parliament, to cheers from her party’s benches.
Lawyer and the co-ordinator of advocacy group Judges Matter, Alison Tilley, told the BBC the removals were an important moment in the country’s history.
“It has taken time but it shows the systems to hold the judiciary accountable for its work. There are mechanisms that are now in place that give us confidence that a similar process would not take as long.”