Quote of the week

Regard must be had to the higher standard of conduct expected from public officials, and the number of falsehoods that have been put forward by the Public Protector in the course of the litigation.  This conduct included the numerous “misstatements”, like misrepresenting, under oath, her reliance on evidence of economic experts in drawing up the report, failing to provide a complete record, ordered and indexed, so that the contents thereof could be determined, failing to disclose material meetings and then obfuscating the reasons for them and the reasons why they had not been previously disclosed, and generally failing to provide the court with a frank and candid account of her conduct in preparing the report. The punitive aspect of the costs order therefore stands.

KHAMPEPE J and THERON J
Public Protector v South African Reserve Bank (CCT107/18) [2019] ZACC 29 (22 July 2019)
20 October 2008

Salary increase for John Hlope an excellent idea

The Cape Argus reported on Friday that Cape Judge President John Hlophe, who is on leave pending an investigation into allegations of gross misconduct against him, will be earning R1.4 m annually following the 11% increase for all judicial officers. The pay increase, which was gazetted last week, will be backdated to 1 April.

The tone of the report (not available online) suggests that this is a bad thing. I disagree.

Judges must be paid a decent salary to ensure their independence and impartiality and to ensure that high quality lawyers make themselves available for selection to the Bench. Over the past ten years the salaries of judges have actually decreased in real terms while the need to attract good lawyers to the Bench from designated groups have increased.

This is no excuse for the Oasis debacle, but perhaps the Judge President would never have gotten himself in such a terrible ethical fix if he had been paid a salary commensurate with his position.

For us ordinary folks who slave away for less money, this might sounds like a high salary, but it is a small price to pay to safeguard against corruption on the Bench and to ensure that the quality of those who apply for positions on the Bench do not decrease so fatally that justice will not be able to be done in any way.

While I am of the opinion (along with about half the members of the Judicial Services Commission) that Judge President Hlophe should have faced an impeachment hearing because of his unethical entaglment with the Oasis group, I do not begrudge judges relatively decent salaries.

I suppose the state must realise “you get what you pay for” and if the state fails to pay judges well the administration of justice will deteriorate even further and we will all be worse off. So, even though a few cents of my taxes are going to the salary of John Hlophe, I am paying it with a smile on my face.

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest