The recent media reports of a Gauteng High Court judge in Pretoria delivering a judgment three years after reserving it are a huge blot on the country’s justice system.
Judge Letty Molopa-Sethosa’s delayed judgment case also has serious ramifications for public trust in the judiciary, access to justice and the political optics amid current allegations of criminal infiltration in the justice system.
The extraordinary delay, coupled with the absence of any reporting on the outstanding ruling, severely damages public confidence.
Judicial integrity depends on transparency, accountability, and timely justice. When a case disappears from official records and is forgotten for years, even if due to administrative oversight, it creates perceptions of negligence or possible concealment.
This undermines faith that judges adhere to professional norms and ethical duties, especially when the current political discourse already questions judicial susceptibility to criminal influence.
Justice delayed is justice denied. Delays of this magnitude deter rightful claims, favour wealthier or better-connected parties, and hinder effective resolution of disputes essential for economic and social stability.
The systemic failure to flag overdue judgments exposes indigent or less resourced litigants to prolonged uncertainty, disproportionately impacting access to justice for vulnerable
communities.
At a time when South Africa grapples with allegations that criminal syndicates have infiltrated the criminal justice system, such administrative blips feed narratives of dysfunction and vulnerability within the judiciary.
The lack of an automated or enforced system to track judgments seems to confirm systemic weaknesses. This fuels political scepticism, erodes legitimacy, and raises fears that corruption or influence-peddling could delay or derail cases.
Authorities’ slow responses – taking nearly a year just to verify the matter, also reinforce perceptions of institutional paralysis and weak governance.
This case highlights critical flaws in the judiciary’s self-monitoring approach. Relying on judges and their secretaries to endorse and report judgments allows lapses to go unnoticed for years.
The suggested solution of an automated electronic tracking system aligns with international best practices, strengthening transparency and preventing avoidable delays.
Without such reforms, accountability remains tokenistic, increasing the risk of recurrences.
Unfortunately, the judgment delay and reporting failure in this case deepen public cynicism about the judiciary’s capacity and willingness to deliver timely justice transparently.
This not only harms litigants but also undermines the country’s constitutional democracy by jeopardising the rule of law.
Given the ongoing allegations of criminal infiltration in South African justice institutions, urgent reforms are needed to restore trust, protect access to justice, and safeguard judiciary independence from political and criminal interference.
• Lekota is a veteran journalist
