The members of the JSC carry a significant constitutional obligation to recommend fit and proper candidates for judicial office. “There can be absolutely no question but that an untruthful person is not a fit and proper person…” īefore a Judge is appointed, he or she must go through rigorous interviews by the Judicial Service Commission (“JSC”). In 1998 the late Chief Justice Ismail Mahomed introduced the guidelines to elaborate on the section 174 requirements, included in these is the necessity for the applicant to be a person of integrity. It is commonly accepted that in order to be "fit and proper" a person must show integrity, reliability and honesty. However, the standard applied is not absolute and prescriptive. Case law has shed some light on the accepted meaning in the context of public officials and legal officers. What exactly constitutes a fit and proper person is not defined or described in legislation or regulations. Requirements include, being a South African citizen, having the necessary qualifications and most importantly, for the purposes of this brief, a fit and proper person. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 8 of 106 (“Constitution”) prescribes the appointment of judicial officers in section 174. A central question, here, would relate to whether or not the inherent bias of his racist remarks taint his judgments already handed down? In particular, the brief will review the case of Judge Motata and the implications of his actions. This brief will evaluate at the Constitution’s mechanisms for judicial impeachment, and consider specific instances where this section 177 provision has been invoked. THIS BRIEF CONSIDERS CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH JUDGES CAN BE IMPEACHED FOR GROSS MISCONDUCT SPECIFICALLY CONSIDERING THE CASE OF JUDGE NKOLA MOTATA Jade Weiner writes on the impeachment of judges in the light of the Nkola Motata case
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |