Civil society calls for transparent NDPP process
JOHANNESBURG - South Africa is preparing for the appointment of a new National Director of Public Prosecutions, a process set out in the Constitution and the NPA Act.
The position holds significant responsibility for prosecutorial decisions and must remain independent from political influence.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
2 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
National Assembly behaved inconsistently with Constitution when it designated Hlophe to serve on JSC
CAPE TOWN - The Western Cape High Court said that the National Assembly behaved inconsistently with the Constitution when it agreed to the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party's John Hlophe being designated as one of six MPs to serve on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). In setting aside the decision on Monday, the court said that the National Assembly's decision was neither lawful nor rational considering his impeachment as a judge. The Democratic Alliance (DA), Freedom Under Law (FUL) and Corruption Watch all challenged Parliament's decision in separate applications, which the court heard as a single matter in February. In its judgment, the court found Hlophe not to be a fit or proper person for the job. ALSO READ: DA celebrates High Court ruling against John Hlophe The designation of its representatives to the JSC was one of the first decisions the new Parliament had to make in July last year. As the main opposition party, the MK Party is permitted to make a nomination from its ranks and chose Hlophe because of his vast experience as a jurist. The DA, Freedom Front Plus and African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) objected, given that only five months earlier, the same House had impeached him as a judge on the recommendation of the very body he now sought to return to as an MP. In its judgment, the court said that while Hlophe's experience was undisputed, his impeachment on gross misconduct charges makes him unsuitable for the job and that the National Assembly had considered irrelevant considerations in arriving at its decision. The court criticised Parliament for relying on the premise that nothing in the Constitution bars a member of the National Assembly to the JSC. "The National Assembly was obliged to consider a glaringly relevant fact, namely that the NA had recently impeached Dr Hlophe for gross misconduct," reads the judgment. "Merely because section 178(1)(h) of the Constitution does not expressly require that a designated nominee must be fit and proper for appointment, does not imply that it would be lawful or rational to appoint individuals who are not fit and proper." The court said in this matter that a decision by the National Assembly would be unlawful and unconstitutional if it frustrated, rather than assisted or protected the independence, impartiality, dignity and effectiveness of the courts. The court also made an order that a judge impeached for gross misconduct may never serve on the JSC.
Eyewitness News
3 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
DA celebrates High Court ruling against John Hlophe
CAPE TOWN - The Democratic Alliance (DA) said that Monday's high court ruling against the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party's parliamentary leader, John Hlophe, was a victory for the rule of law and the Constitution. The Western Cape High Court found Hlophe to neither be fit nor proper to serve on the body that interviews candidates to become judges. The DA was one of three bodies that filed separate legal applications in this matter after the National Assembly approved Hlophe's designation in July last year. The DA, Freedom Front Plus and the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) objected during the vote. READ: WC High Court finds its former Judge President John Hlophe unfit to serve on JSC Hlophe subsequently resigned from the JSC after the DA obtained an interdict to stop him from participating in the work of the commission until the court had heard the merits of its case. DA spokesperson Karabo Khakhau said that Monday's judgment stressed that public confidence in the judiciary's composition and the administration of justice was vital. "It cannot be that a disgraced judge, an impeached judge who has been found guilty of manipulating processes of the court, of trying to influence other judges unduly for political reasons, must serve on the judicial service commission, particularly given the important role it plays in appointing other judges across the land. So, we are very happy that this is a win for democracy, this is a win for the people of South Africa. It is a win for the independence of the courts."
IOL News
12 hours ago
- IOL News
Western Cape High Court rules against Dr John Hlophe's appointment to Judicial Service Commission
The Western Cape High Court has delivered a significant ruling against Dr Mandlakayise John Hlophe, the impeached former judge, declaring that he cannot be part of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The court's decision, handed down on Monday, underscores the imperative of judicial integrity and the constitutional responsibilities of South Africa's legislative body. In a judgement that has reignited debates about the judiciary's independence, the High Court found that the National Assembly (NA) had failed to appropriately exercise its discretion when approving Hlophe's appointment, an oversight that effectively undermined the credibility of the JSC. The court's order reflects a broad consensus that rigorous standards must be upheld in judicial appointments, especially for a body entrusted with safeguarding the country's constitutional commitment. The implications of the ruling are profound, as the JSC is constitutionally mandated to recommend judicial appointments and hold judges accountable. The court stated that failing to act responsibly in Hlophe's nomination could jeopardise the very independence the JSC is supposed to protect. Hlophe was nominated to the JSC last year but subsequently resigned amidst a flurry of controversy. The court explicitly stated that "Dr. Mandlakayise John Hlophe may not be designated to serve on the Judicial Services Commission in terms of section 178(1)(h) of the Constitution," marking a rare judicial rebuke of a parliamentary appointment. The judgment comes after a legal challenge by organisations including Freedom Under Law, Corruption Watch, and the Democratic Alliance (DA). These groups argued that including an impeached judge in the JSC threatened the integrity and independence of South Africa's judiciary. 'The judiciary is essential to the maintenance of constitutional democracy,' they asserted, solidifying their stance against any attempts that could compromise its impartiality. Dr Hlophe became South Africa's first judge to be impeached in its democratic era in February 2024, following charges stemming from a misconduct case dating back to 2008. He faced serious allegations of attempting to improperly influence Constitutional Court Justices Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta in a matter concerning then-President Jacob Zuma. After a protracted legal battle, the JSC finally recommended his removal in 2021, with Parliament voting in favour of impeachment only three years later. In response to the court's ruling, DA federal chairperson Helen Zille stated, "The High Court order to bar an impeached judge from serving on the Judicial Services Commission is a victory for the rule of law and the Constitution." She emphasised that the JSC must consist of members who are "fit and proper" and hold the public's confidence, reflecting the broader societal imperative for transparency and accountability within the judiciary. This latest development stands as a testament to the ongoing efforts to reinforce the principles of lawful governance within South Africa, propelling the conversation about judicial integrity into the national spotlight once more. DAILY NEWS
