High court findings against Ntlemeza described as ‘judicial excess’
The Helen Suzman Foundation is basing its case on the findings last year that he lied under oath.
This emerged in the High Court in Pretoria where the Helen Suzman Foundation has applied to have the decision to appoint Ntlemeza set aside.
The foundation is basing its case on the findings last year that the Hawks boss lied under oath and lacked integrity.
Advocate William Mokhari says judges should be mindful when making scathing findings against people because they are binding and impact on their dignity.
He says Judge Elias Matojane's findings against the Hawks head emanate from his anger caused by Ntlemeza's allegations that the judge had met with the opposing counsel in chambers.
He says Matojane never afforded Ntlemeza an opportunity to address the court on the issues which informed the adverse findings.
In spite of the ruling, Mokhari referred to case law which allowed the minister to accept an explanation from Ntlemeza and not reach conclusions on his propriety solely on the judgment.
Judgment has been reserved.