Simelane judgement: DA to study judgement

The Democratic Alliance notes and respects the decision handed down today in the North Gauteng High Court, in the matter of the Democratic Alliance's challenge to the appointment of Adv. Menzi Simelane as National Director of Public Prosecutions.

We will be studying the judgment carefully, to understand fully the reasoning behind it, after which we will consider our response to it. From first principles we consider this matter to go to the heart of our criminal justice system and, in that regard, the possibility that we might pursue the case to the Constitutional Court is a real and viable option.

We remain convinced that the appointment of Adv. Menzi Simelane as the National Director of Public Prosecutions was wrong, and that he is not a fit and proper person to occupy that post. The NPA fulfils a crucial role in the criminal justice system and it is essential that its head is seen to be completely beyond reproach and independent from the executive.

On our first reading of the judgment, it would seem that the judge made his ruling on the view that, in the absence of a prescribed and open process for the appointment of the NDPP, there was no basis in law on which to reverse the President's appointment. However, the judge does not mince his words about the suitability of Mr. Simelane to occupy this post.

Paragraph 76 of the judgment reads as follows: "the averments made by the DA, after an extensive investigation and consideration of Mr. Simelane's background, indeed constitute a formidable onslaught on Mr. Simelane's fitness and propriety for appointment as NDPP, and therefore, also on the validity of the President's decision."

Paragraph 80 reads as follows: "...it would appear that relative superficial consideration had been given to the election of a suitable candidate for the appointment in the position of NDPP. There is no indication that the President has given any attention to any other possible candidates. On the contrary all indications are that the President had...favoured Mr. Simelane, and no one else, for the position of NDPP."

Furthermore, paragraph 100 reads as follows: "I am not persuaded that, if regard is had to all the averments made in the papers, that he is not a controversial person and one with an unblemished background or that he is one of the most experienced persons who could have been taken into consideration for appointment."

The judge was critical of Adv. Simelane in a number of other respects as well.

The fact that the judge did not award costs against the DA is, we believe, significant. It is clear that the judge recognises that this is a matter of considerable public interest, and concerns deep democratic principle. Indeed, the judgment specifically says that "in view of the background facts on which (the) application was based, the DA acted fairly and reasonably to have been concerned, as a number of other prominent persons in our community, on the person of Mr. Simelane and the manner in which the appointment had been effected". 

Statement issued by James Selfe, MP, Democratic Alliance Chairperson of the Federal Executive, November 10 2010

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter