Judges, the quartet argued, should not be placed “in fear, through manufactured complaint or blatant criticism”.
In democratic societies, the team added, “judges must not be liable to disciplinary sanctions, or premature retirement because their decisions, discussions or expression of views do not find favour with the powers that be, or with any powerful vested interest, or with prevailing public opinion”.
Judge Hlophe’s team equated the Judicial Conduct Tribunal akin to a “criminal prosecution” and accused Justices Chris Jafta and Bess Nkabinde of altering statements after 12 years, not out of their own volition but under duress.
“JP is entitled to make a submission of no case to answer [in local lingua, a discharge], on the basis there is no evidence that the JP committed the offence referred to in the charge sheet,” his team argued.
The first attempt came early on the third day of proceedings on Friday 11 December when Griffiths, without prior notice, informed the tribunal that Hlophe’s team would be objecting to advocate Gilbert Marcus – representing Constitutional Court justices – presenting argument.
After a 12-year-delay Hlophe’s tribunal hearing began on Monday 7 December and while final arguments were heard on Friday, it will resume on Tuesday 15 December after a late-afternoon, last-minute request by Hlophe’s legal team.
This move, Marcus cautioned the panel, was “a scarcely veiled attempt to set up a potential review” [of the findings] and, “I can only suspect we will be presented with something new.”
Tribunal deliberates on Hlopeâs comments, conduct
By Don Makatile
Share
Johannesburg - After a week-long deliberation it would appear the 12-year-old case against Judge John Hlophe will finally be brought to a close by the Judicial Conduct Tribunal that was set up in 2013 to probe the matter.
Held over five days last week at the Premier Hotel, OR Tambo International Airport in Kempton Park, east of Joburg, the tribunal conducted hearings on the complaint lodged by Justices of the Constitutional Court against Hlophe, President of Western Cape Division of the High Court.
On Friday, parties on both sides of the matter made their closing arguments at the tribunal.
THE Judicial Conduct Tribunal has a tough task to prove that Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe had made an attempt to influence two Constitutional Court judges to rule in favour of former president Jacob Zuma when he faced prosecution for alleged corruption in the arms deal.
Forced slant given to Judge John Hlophe phrase, says expert witness
By Chris Ndaliso
Share
Durban -THE Judicial Conduct Tribunal has a tough task to prove that Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe had made an attempt to influence two Constitutional Court judges to rule in favour of former president Jacob Zuma when he faced prosecution for alleged corruption in the arms deal.