The chairperson of the DA federal council, Helen Zille, contends that the outcome of the Western Cape High Court’s ruling on John Hlophe’s interdiction will either support or threaten the independence of the judiciary.
She said it could not be that she, as the Western Cape premier, fought for the impeachment of the now uMkhonto weSizwe MP only for him to be designated to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
Zille was speaking outside court on Thursday.
Oath of office
She asserted that Hlophe had breached his oath of office by trying to influence the judges of the Constitutional Court to rule in favour of former president Jacob Zuma.
Zille pointed out that a key issue for the court was whether someone who has been impeached and deemed unfit to serve as a judge should be allowed to sit on the JSC, which is responsible for interviewing and selecting judges.
Although the MK Party is free to choose a representative for the JSC, she expressed worry that the party chose a candidate with a conflict of interest, specifically the first judge in South Africa to face impeachment by parliament.
Fitness to serve
“The MK Party argued that we cannot question or second guess their choice for the Judicial Service Commission. And they claim that parliament has appointed him to serve on the JSC,” said Zille.
She clarified that while the National Assembly can confirm party appointments to the JSC, this right should not be absolute.
The fitness and property of the nominees must also be considered.
Zille explained further: “The courts will have to interpret the constitution in this context.
“I’m not a lawyer, but the constitution is very clear that the judiciary must be independent, trustworthy, and carry the confidence of South Africa.”
