‘Maybe I am a prisoner of the remnants of my Calvinist upbringing, but I really do not think it is appropriate for any judge anywhere in the world to drive around in a Porsche. It is more troubling in a country where so many poor black people live in shacks, the divide between rich and poor is so glaring and the Constitution purports to establish a more caring and egalitarian society.’

‘I think Judge President Hlophe is bringing the judiciary into disrepute by driving such a flashy car and I think it is relevant when one comments on his anti-poor judgments to point out that he might be black but that he has seemingly forgotten the poor. Because this is an anti-poor judgment but now delivered by a judge who might be black but has definitely not struggled to be either humble or poor.’

‘If one cannot condemn deeply problematic and unethical actions of a judge, actions which ahd besmirched his name and the integrity of the judiciary as a whole merely because that judge happens to be black and has white detractors, then one is not a free agent but a prisoner of the racist paradigm one is supposedly resisting.’

‘Rumour has it that the judge is known for his love of alcohol and that he has a Manto Tshabalala Msimang problem.’

‘Would it not be better for his own reputation and for the reputation of the judiciary if he resigned as judge? Even judges can get drunk (and do!), and they can of course be forgiven for misdemeanors, but Judge Motata’s alleged behaviour seem really beyond the pale.’

‘If it is correct that he was so drunk that he inadvertently reversed his car though a wall, resisted arrest, shouted sexist and racist abuse at others and then told the newspaper that he had not been drunk because he was just back from having tea with a friend, he does seem rather unfit to be a judge on the High Court.’

‘But the legitimacy of the judiciary is based on perceptions and not on technicalities. Once the ordinary public starts thinking that crooks and drunks populate the benches of the High Court, respect for the judiciary will take a nosedive. Which is bad for the legal system and even worse for our democracy.’

‘Who is to blame for the stress placed on the judiciary and the legal profession by the saga around Cape Judge President John Hlope? The National Association for Democratic Lawyers (Nadel) seems to suggest it is those who had criticised the original decision of the Judicial Services Commission not to pursue the complaint against Judge Hlophe that should bear the brunt of the blame.’

‘According to a press release from Nadel, this comment “had undermined constitutional institutions, in particular the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), called into question the integrity of the chief justice — who presides over the JSC — and polarised the judiciary and legal profession along racial lines”.’

‘I heard rumours that ANC Parliamentarians had already indicated to the JSC that even if an impeachment recommendation is made, they would vote against it, so this might also have influence the JSC to make the spineless and disgraceful decision it did.’

‘Please people, you are insulting our intelligence and hurting our democracy and respect for the judiciary. ‘

Yeah well right fine…

It would seem as though Mayor Zille has defended herself incredibly well- she has been totally open with investigators, with the media, and there seems to be very little suggest that she may have done anything wrong. It seems quite clear then that the Erasmus Commission is nothing more than a well planned, ‘legal’ smeer campaign against Zille, ahead of the 2009 elections.

If we accept that, then I am also dissapointed in Judge Erasmus for allowing himself to be party to that abuse of power by Rasool, and it seems fair to say so publicly.

I believe you have been quite unfair and inconsistent in some of your criticism of Mayor Zille. Perhaps you should accept your defense and turn your attention to why our Cabinet has chosen to ignore the report of a much more legitimate, much more important commission, the Khampepe Commission.

It is also clear that you allow sentiment and political nuiances to cloud your usual good judgment/insight.

Why are you so personal?
Sure, I also tend to dislike most politicians – purely because there are few that really care (they would rather play the game and further their careers).

You refer to her “blanket denial” in your “Mayor Pinocchio” post, yet when she responds you continue with your own “blanket response”…totally ignoring her points. Some are valid, some aren’t (my view).

I do understand that you are busy, but that’s the thing about getting personal: once you’ve started, you owe your target the TIME to a) digest b) respond to their responses in FAIR manner.

As a constitutional expert I would expect you to try to moderate and stimulate debate in a more OBJECTIVE manner, without getting personal.

Saying that, I do enjoy your often tongue in the cheek, but very clear & direct view on issues.

—

As a side.
What makes judges so special that we can’t criticise them?

True, it does need to happen in a ADULT way, but you will know that you get good judges and some really poor ones.

Yet once a judge, pretty much always a judge. There is no proper peer review, or well-defined programme to IMPROVE quality of judgments and move towards the judicial standards that you typically find in Europe.

Respect is EARNED.
Judges can’t expect US (the good citizens of this country) to just accept that being a judge makes you ABOVE the law. Didn’t we learn from Apartheid? There is nothing wrong to question, it is HOW we question that is important.

Peirre,

What is the difference between what GodZille did and your critic of Judge Hlophe? I have always thought that you are fond of the father of western medicine.