No one is above the law, says DA after Parly votes to impeach Hlophe & Motata
The Democratic Alliance (DA) said that Parliament’s resolution that Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe should be impeached, sent a message that no one was above the law.
Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe. Picture: Werner Beukes/SAPA.
JOHANNESBURG - The Democratic Alliance (DA) said that Parliament’s resolution that Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe should be impeached, sent a message that no one was above the law.
The resolution was taken on Wednesday by way of vote.
Shortly afterward, another resolution was also taken to impeach retired Gauteng High Court Judge Nkola Motata.
Parliament will now communicate both resolutions to the president, who will be tasked with affecting them.
The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has found that Hlophe improperly attempted to influence Constitutional Court Justices in a case involving former President Jacob Zuma.
The DA said his actions "posed a serious risk to the impartiality and independence of the South African judiciary".
The impeachment of "any judge", the party continues, underscored the importance of upholding the highest ethical standards, the rule of law, and the Constitution among judicial officers.
And it further added that it "sends a clear message that no one, regardless of their position or influence, is above the law" and "reaffirms the principle of judicial independence as a cornerstone of democracy".
The DA, like several others, expressed concerns with the drawn-out nature of the process, with the events at the heart of the matter dating back to 2008.
It describes it as "protracted and complex, with extensive investigations, hearings, and deliberations by the JSC".
'A SAD MOMENT'
Meanwhile, Freedom Under Law has described as "a sad moment" the now-imminent impeachment of Hlophe and Motata.
This will be the first time in post-democratic South Africa that a judge has ever been impeached and Freedom Under Law says it represents "a sad moment for the judiciary".
However, the organisation also describes it as "a crucial step in ensuring judicial accountability" and said it’s vital to protecting the integrity of the judiciary and public confidence therein "that there are serious and meaningful sanctions imposed on judges who commit serious acts of misconduct".
This brings to a close what’s been a protracted process - spanning more than a decade - in both matters.
And Freedom Under Law said it had "taken far longer than it should have and has highlighted many problematic aspects with the process of holding judges accountable" but that final outcome was to be welcomed nonetheless.