Hlophe: ‘no impeachment for this one’

Judicial conduct body to probe ‘f**k off’ complaint against WC judge president

The Judicial Conduct Committee (JCC) will investigate a complaint against suspended Western Cape judge president John Hlophe for advising an advocate to tell his client to “f**k off”. However, he is unlikely to face impeachment if found guilty.

Western Cape advocate Anda Njeza complained to the JCC in December 2021 that Hlophe had told him to impart this to his client and that if his case was heard in open court he would dismiss it with costs. Njeza alleged the judge president said his case was a waste of time and when the advocate insisted his client wanted a hearing, Hlophe “kept telling me that I did not want to listen”.

The case involved the return of a firearm to Njeza’s client. The advocate said Hlophe “indicated that he would never give a taxi driver a firearm as he knows how dangerous taxi drivers can be”.

In a decision this week, deputy chief justice Mandisa Maya, acting chair of the JCC, said she had considered Njeza’s complaint and was “satisfied” that if it were to be established, “the appropriate remedial action against [Hlophe] will be limited to one or more of the remedial actions envisaged in section 17(8) of the JSC [Judicial Service Commission] Act”.

“This means that the sanction will not be impeachment,” she said.

Section 17 deals with “serious non-impeachable” misconduct and section 17(8) lists remedial steps that can be directed against a guilty judge, including an apology, a reprimand, a written warning, compensation and “appropriate counselling”.

Supreme Court of Appeal judge and JCC member Tati Makgoka was designated to look into the complaint “to determine its merits”.

In terms of the act, Makgoka’s inquiry does not have to be formal, but Hlophe must be given an opportunity to respond to the allegations, and Njeza to Hlophe.

In the end, Makgoka may dismiss the complaint or find Hlophe “behaved in a manner which is unbecoming of a judge” and impose one of the remedial steps or recommend the complaint be investigated by a Judicial Conduct Tribunal.

This last option would mean that after the conclusion of the investigation, Makgoka is of the view that impeachable conduct may be established.

In his complaint to the JCC, Njeza said: “I felt as a matter of principle that I should lay this complaint. A judge, let alone a judge president, should not treat any litigant or any legal representative with the kind of indignity the applicant and I were treated with.” He added that Hlophe’s conduct meant his client was denied his constitutional right to court access.

Hlophe faces impeachment regarding a separate complaint, filed in 2008, that led to a JSC finding of gross misconduct. He is challenging the JSC decision in court.

The JSC is also meeting in March to decide whether he should be investigated for potentially impeachable conduct after a 2020 complaint regarding a dispute between him and his deputy, Patricia Goliath.