Cartoon sourced from Mail & Gaurdian OnlineTHE nation waits with a keen interest as the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) prepares to announce its much-anticipated decision on controversial Cape Judge President John Hlophe.
The three-man JSC sub-committee has arrived at a decision pertaining to allegations that Hlophe improperly tried to influence an outcome in a Constitutional Court case involving ANC leader Jacob Zuma. During the preliminary hearings in Johannesburg last month, Hlophe's accusers justices Chris Jafta and Bess Nkabinde admitted that in their conversations with the controversial one it was not really clear whether he was trying to influence them to rule in favour of Zuma, who had at the time approached the highest court in the land to make a ruling on his privacy rights relating to his legal battle against the National Prosecuting Authority.
In a nutshell, the main purpose of the preliminary probe was to establish whether there were sufficient grounds to subject Hlophe to a JSC hearing for alleged gross misconduct. Should he be charged with allegations of gross misconduct, he faces impeachment if found guilty. But considering his accusers' evidence, it would be quite a task to arrive at a conclusion that Hlophe had the intention to improperly influence the outcome of the ConCourt case.
So, bloggers, how would you rule if you were in JSC's shoes? Would you say there's sufficient grounds to charge the controversial one?
I would say there isn't enough concrete evidence, if there is then the man who accused was looking out for has to now look out for the accused (ways of the world today). Either way, he will come out victorious.
ReplyDeleteSo you reckon the victory is Hlophe's. We'll soon find out if you're right!
ReplyDeleteWhen an individual is accused of an alleged misconduct, there must be, a concrete evidence
ReplyDeleteon the table to prove that in the court of law. If the accusers of Judge Hlophe could not provide concrete evidence during the preliminary hearings. Not being clear on whether Hlophe was improperly influencing the ConCourt case or not (themselves)! Then that gives him a high possibility of walking out as a winner.
So far bloggers see the JP emerging triumphant. Interesting stuff!
ReplyDelete