PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma yesterday went against speculations that he would appoint a woman chief justice.
He has nominated Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng as his preferred candidate to replace Judge Sandile Ngcobo as chief justice of South Africa.
There has been speculations that Zuma would show his commitment to gender equality and nominate Judge Sisi Khampepe who, together with Mogoeng, was appointed as a Constitutional Court judge in 2009.
It is indeed Zuma's prerogative to nominate and appoint whoever he deems to be chief justice. But the question is whether Mogoeng is the best South Africa can produce as a candidate for chief justice.
What comes to mind are the questions raised when in 2009 Zuma identified Mogoeng as one of his preferred candidates for the four vacant seats on the Constitutional Court.
One of the objections raised then was that though Mogoeng had written judgments with constitutional ramifications, he was largely a labour law specialist who previously served in the Labour Court.
A further concern was that his experience could create a perception that he was open to influence. The concern was raised in the context that it is common course for junior judges to seek guidance from senior judges.
Earlier this year, in the matter of Roux vs Dey, Mogoeng raised eyebrows within the legal fraternity when he did not explain why he had dissented from the other judges. The case concerned schoolboys who had downloaded a photograph of two men sexually stimulating each other and superimposed the faces of two teachers on the original. One of the teachers sued and the matter ended up in the Constitutional Court.
All the judges agreed that the boys' apology was not sufficient, but, except for Mogoeng, they agreed "regarding expression about constitutionally protected groups". (The groups concerned were gays and lesbians.)
Constitutional experts regarded Mogoeng's behaviour as curious. Normally if a judge in this highest court does not like what others say, he spells out why. This is part of the judicial accountability expected of the judges.
Questions have been raised as to whether Mogoeng is aware of this important expectation on him as judge of the highest court in the land. In nominating Mogoeng, Zuma has overlooked more experienced judges like Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke - who has been a constitutional judge since 2002.
Mogoeng will earn his stripes only if he effectively deals with these questions.
Zuma choice confounds
PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma yesterday went against speculations that he would appoint a woman chief justice.
He has nominated Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng as his preferred candidate to replace Judge Sandile Ngcobo as chief justice of South Africa.
There has been speculations that Zuma would show his commitment to gender equality and nominate Judge Sisi Khampepe who, together with Mogoeng, was appointed as a Constitutional Court judge in 2009.
It is indeed Zuma's prerogative to nominate and appoint whoever he deems to be chief justice. But the question is whether Mogoeng is the best South Africa can produce as a candidate for chief justice.
What comes to mind are the questions raised when in 2009 Zuma identified Mogoeng as one of his preferred candidates for the four vacant seats on the Constitutional Court.
One of the objections raised then was that though Mogoeng had written judgments with constitutional ramifications, he was largely a labour law specialist who previously served in the Labour Court.
A further concern was that his experience could create a perception that he was open to influence. The concern was raised in the context that it is common course for junior judges to seek guidance from senior judges.
Earlier this year, in the matter of Roux vs Dey, Mogoeng raised eyebrows within the legal fraternity when he did not explain why he had dissented from the other judges. The case concerned schoolboys who had downloaded a photograph of two men sexually stimulating each other and superimposed the faces of two teachers on the original. One of the teachers sued and the matter ended up in the Constitutional Court.
All the judges agreed that the boys' apology was not sufficient, but, except for Mogoeng, they agreed "regarding expression about constitutionally protected groups". (The groups concerned were gays and lesbians.)
Constitutional experts regarded Mogoeng's behaviour as curious. Normally if a judge in this highest court does not like what others say, he spells out why. This is part of the judicial accountability expected of the judges.
Questions have been raised as to whether Mogoeng is aware of this important expectation on him as judge of the highest court in the land. In nominating Mogoeng, Zuma has overlooked more experienced judges like Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke - who has been a constitutional judge since 2002.
Mogoeng will earn his stripes only if he effectively deals with these questions.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos