The Legal Practice Council’s (LPC) case against prominent lawyer Adv Dali Mpofu suffered another blow after four more people refused to testify against the former EFF chairperson.
Sunday World understands that former ANC MP Richard Dyantyi and four senior judges – Dustan Mlambo, Joseph Raulinga, Mpostoli Twala and Ingrid Opperman – have refused to testify against Mpofu.
The four have joined Chief Justice Mandisa Maya and former public protector Thuli Madonsela in refusing to testify against the legal eagle, a move that threatens to derail the proceedings entirely.
The withdrawal of the four also comes after the LPC’s decision to drop three of the seven charges against Mpofu, plunging the case into crisis.
On Wednesday, the LPC announced it had withdrawn three charges against Mpofu after Maya and Madonsela declined to participate in the hearings.
The dropped charges related to Mpofu’s alleged misconduct during cross-examinations of Madonsela and remarks about Maya and were considered
critical to the case.
Dyantyi and the four judges were central to at least six of the original seven charges, which accused Mpofu of bringing the legal profession into disrepute through threats, unethical cross-examinations, and inappropriate conduct.
Their refusal to engage leaves the LPC with only two participants: civil society group Casac, the complainant, and former Sars executive Johan van
Loggerenberg.
Of the original seven charges, only four remain, but even these face significant hurdles:
- Charge 1: Mpofu’s alleged threat to Dyantyi during the Section 194 inquiry into then-suspended public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane. Dyantyi’s unavailability leaves the LPC without a key witness to contextualise Mpofu’s “Your day will come” remark.
- Charge 4: Accuses Mpofu of insinuating during a 2022 cross-examination that Van Loggerenberg suffered from mental health issues. This charge survives, as Van Loggerenberg remains a witness.
- Charge 6: Mpofu is accused of baselessly accusing Judge President Dustan Mlambo of sexual harassment during a Judicial Service Commission interview. Mlambo’s refusal to testify forces the LPC to rely on transcripts.
- Charge 7: Centres on a 2021 letter Mpofu sent to judges Raulinga, Twala and Opperman, which the court described as “disquieting”. The judges’ withdrawal strips the charge of firsthand accounts of harm.
The mass exodus of witnesses has exposed glaring weaknesses in the LPC’s disciplinary framework. Established to regulate legal practitioners, the council lacks subpoena powers to compel testimony, relying instead on voluntary cooperation.
Mpofuhas long dismissed the charges as “laughable”.
Casac’s executive secretary Lawson Naidoo said on Friday, “Our complaints were based on matters that are fully in the
public domain; they were reported on extensively”.
“The complaint does not rely on the evidence of the persons who were the target of Adv Mpofu’s conduct. As the body legislatively mandated to
oversee standards and conduct of the legal profession, it is the responsibility of the Legal Practice Council to investigate and conduct the necessary disciplinary processes in accordance with its code of conduct,” Naidoo added.
Casac’s original complaint of May 11, 2023, includes multiple instances where Mpofu allegedly behaved unprofessionally, especially towards female legal practitioners and witnesses. From the complaint, it seemed Casac relied heavily on public records, court judgments, and media reports. But circumventing the need for live witnesses could be tricky.
But the approach also has disadvantages; for example, Mpofu could argue his comments were misconstrued. Without live witnesses to cross-examine, it’s harder to assess intent. There’s also the risk that using media reports could be considered relying on public opinion rather than legal merit.
The LPC declined to comment.
Visit SW YouTube Channel for our video content
