IFP MEDIA STATEMENT BY: 
MR KOOS VAN DER MERWE  MP 
IFP CHIEF WHIP AND SPOKESPERSON ON JUSTICE

30th May 2008

The fact that the latest complaint against judge Hlophe is laid by judges of the Constitutional Court is conclusive proof that judge Hlophe is not a fit and proper person to hold the office of a judge of the High Court.  

The Constitutional Court views the matter in a very serious light and is clearly of the view that Hlophe has violated his oath of office and the provisions of the Constitution regarding the role and function of courts. 

Judge Hlophe is an embarrassment to the Judiciary in general and to the Bench in particular. 

It is necessary that details of the complaints against judge Hlophe be made public, not only in respect of this complaint, but also in respect of previous complaints against him.  

I have obtained a legal opinion from Senior Counsel stating that details of complaints against judges are to be made public. I have forwarded a copy of that opinion to the Chief Justice. I quote a paragraph or two from the legal opinion - 

3.1   For all of the afore going reasons I am of the view that an approach which entails that disciplinary action / inquests against Judges could or should be shrouded in a cloud of secrecy and hence be placed outside the ambit of accountability, responsiveness and openness, violates the very essence of the basic and intrinsic values of the Constitution.  In addition, public interest demands that the integrity and conduct of members of the Bench be beyond reproach at all times.  The very same public interest therefore entitles the public to be provided with the reasons, whenever the integrity (in the broadest sense) of a judicial officer has been challenged and such challenge found (by the JSC) to be well grounded ( or unfounded, as the case may be).  

3.2   The upshot is that a refusal to make public such record/reasons/finding, ironically amounts to a disdain for the Rule of Law by the very body which is supposedly enjoined to be the ultimate guardian of the integrity of the Bench and the members thereof.  

3.3   In my view, to hold otherwise would be to thwart the interest of justice in its most encompassing sense, in its very essence.   

To withhold details of complaints against judges, will create the impression of a cover-up, which would destroy the judiciary. Judges are to be like Caesar's wife - beyond reproach. Hlophe fails this test with distinction and he cannot argue innocence against the words of a number of judges of the Constitutional Court.  

Hlophe's immediate departure would help to restore trust in the judiciary.

He is clearly contaminating the excellent reputation of the vast majority of High Court judges.