Current laws sufficient to deal with removal of judges, Parliament argues
18 February 2024
Parliament has filed a replying affidavit in the Western Cape High Court arguing, among others, that the current laws allow it to proceed with the matter involving the removal of Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata.
Judge Hlophe has on Tuesday 13 February, lodged an urgent application for the High Court to order that “pending the outcome of (his) application for direct access to the Constitutional Court, the Speaker and/or the National Assembly (NA) be interdicted from going ahead to vote in terms of Section 177 of the Constitution for (his) removal from judicial office.”
In his application, Judge Hlophe argues that Parliament has failed to adopt the necessary rules for the removal of judges in terms of Section 177 of the Constitution. Judge Hlophe incorrectly argues that because the NA does not have such rules – which he argues will guarantee a lawful and fair process that is consistent with Parliament’s constitutional obligations under Section 165 of the Constitution – the vote and adoption of a resolution on the motion to remove him, will be unconstitutional and a direct violation of judicial independence and the separation of powers.
Parliament believes that its decision to go ahead with considering the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services’ recommendations to remove Judges John Hlophe and Nkola Motata is correct, as established general rules and practices of the National Assembly sufficiently allow for such consideration in giving expression to its section 177(1)(b) constitutional mandate.