• Tweet

Gwede Mantashe

RELATED ARTICLES

• FULL INTERVIEW: ANC’s Mantashe lambasts judges
• Congrats for Mogoeng
• In the face of justice
• Mogoeng is an experienced judge - Zuma
• Perceptions of him within the ANC might be hurdle
• Zuma choice confounds
• Zuma nominates new Chief Justice
• Parties query Zuma's choice of chief justice
• Limpopo can't pass its own financial laws
• Court bids farewell to Judge Ngcobo

ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe has come out guns blazing, taking issue with the criticism levelled at President Jacob Zuma's decision to nominate Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng as Chief Justice.

In an exclusive interview with Sowetan editor Mpumelelo Mkhabela, Mantashe warned that the Constitutional Court was being used as an opposition to the ANC-led government.

Question: Mpumelelo Mkhabela: What's the single biggest justification the ANC sees in the appointment of Mogoeng Mogoeng as a chief justice?

Answer: Gwede Mantashe: Let's start from point of principle. Mogoeng has been a judge since 1997.

There are only two judges in the Constitutional Court - Edwin Cameron and Johan Fronemen - who have served longer than him.

This thing of Mogoeng being a junior does not hold water. It is not factual.

The second thing is that everyone who has criticised the decision of the president has not come up with any issues they have against him, except that he is young and inexperienced.

But there is an advantage that he is younger - he will serve longer and thus help to stabilise the institution.

MM: You seem to have serious concerns about the working of the judiciary. What's the problem?

GM: There are many things happening in the judiciary that will only be seen in 10 years time.

One of the things that is dangerous: the independence of judiciary and separation of powers must never be translated into hostility, where one of those arms becomes hostile to the other.

Unless this issue is addressed it's going to cause instability. It undermines the other arms of government .

MM: You mean instability in the judiciary?

GM: No, instability in government. You can't have a judiciary that seeks to arrest the functioning of government.

MM: Do you think judges are positioning themselves as an opposition?

GM: You will have to look at some of the judgments of the Constitutional Court.

MM: Are you referring to the Glenister-Scorpions judgment because the ANC had resolved to (disband the Scorpions and the Constitutional Court took a different view?)

GM: Yes, but that's not the only one. That judgment itself seeks to cast aspersions on the work of Parliament.

Yes, it seeks to make the Hawks independent - fine, we will implement that - but once you have that kind of judgment that ventures into political weighting of views, then it's a slippery road we have embarked on.

Even the judgment on the extension of the term of Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo's term looks very suspicious. You have a section in the law that has been there for over 10 years, and at a point of extending the term of a judge, then it (suddenly) becomes unconstitutional.

When you look at that judgment you ask yourself whether the judges who sat on that bench were not interested parties in the appointment of a new chief justice. Where does that line end, when you sit and be a judge in an area that benefits you?

MM: Judge Mogoeng was part of it.

GM: Yes, but I am talking in terms of principles - whether the judges who sat in the case were not (potential) beneficiaries of their own judgment.

Wouldn't it have served justice better to invite other judges to form the bench and have all (the current) judges recuse themselves?

MM: Do you want to establish that regime?

GM: It is there already, you can bring other judges when those judges are conflicted. It seems as if all of them sat in judgment to make sure that they take over quicker.

MM: Which other judgment worries you? Are you supporting the president's argument that it is wrong for judges to overturn legislation passed by Parliament?

GM: Every time there is legislation that passes through Parliament - for example the Protection of Information Bill - there is a threat that it will be taken to court and the court might position itself emotionally to reverse it. That's a problem.

MM: But the court has not said so.

GM: I am making a point (of principle). We have a bigger problem in the country. The worst thing that can happen is if Parliament gets flat-footed.

We are getting close to a situation where Parliament drafts legislation and refers it to the Constitutional Court before passing it.

MM: Is it not the right of the court to adjudicate on the constitutionality of laws?

GM: It's not a problem. It's about how that right is exercised. If the Constitutional Court positions itself to create a perception that it will overturn anything passed by Parliament, (that will) make nonsense of the democratically elected Parliament.

Comments

• Sign in or sign up to comment

Thu Jun 20 08:30:16 SAST 2013 ::

Aug 18, 2011

molegotla

if other judgement are in favour of the anc it is fine,but it favours the society
then its a problem think outside the box GS we r watchin u we can analize
we are not
stupid as u think we are nxa

Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

ConcernedCity

i think the GM is confusing the Constitution of RSA and ANC.
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

kamza79

hey Gwede just shushhhh! thats so lousy of u moreover when the debate is open for contitutional judge commettee to respond to Zuma......

i dont think you have std8 but you now interfering with something beyond your inteligency..........
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

Tapole

The ANC is taking South African's for granted. Some of us are really getting tired of this.Of course age and experience is not the definite determinations for one to be appointed the Chief Justice, but should be considered too. Mogoeng is young for the Chief Justice position. Why continuously overlooking the Deputy Chief Justice Moseneke. ANC issues with him got nothing to do with us South African. But again what ANC wants ANC gets and ANC always right and just don't listen to anyone but itself.
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

MANTSHA

KEEP UR MOUTH SHUT GM,U CAN'T EVEN ANSWER SIMPLE QUESTIONS'''''
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

jacksprat

Just goes to prove that the anc doesnt give a damn about our constitution. They are merely trying to put people in place to serve the anc best and not the country. The constitution is HIGHER than the anc and if they breech the constitution they need to be called to order. FUKKEN I D I O T S. Do the anc really think the rest of SA are as uneducated and thick as them?
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

TDK

This thing of Mogoeng being a junior does not hold water. It is not factual.

The second thing is that everyone who has criticised the decision of the president has not come up with any issues they have against him, except that he is young and inexperienced.


The appointment of junior and inexperienced people is common in govt especially the politically connected ones. In other words Sista Gwen agrees that the judge is inexperienced.
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

MommaC

I don't get it. Is Gwede REALLY saying that the government is above the law and should be able to discount the constitution at will?

This directly affects the judiciary. They have every right to have !nput into this appointment. I also didn't see anywhere where they were attacking Judge Mogoeng or the government. They were simply querying why more suitable candidates were overlooked for the position. Seems to me that its the politicians interfering with the judiciary and not the other way around here

(REALLY? 1NPUT is a vulgar word ???)
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

BigBoii

Zuma only appoints people that will serve in the ANC's interest.....Why is he overlooking Dikgang Moseneke??...

Is it becasue of what happened between them when Moseneke was still with the ANC?...They have differences and thats when the PAC was formed, Is he afraid that should Dikgang take over, it will be the end of the ANC??...

GM is just following what the master has told him, The ANC doesn't care about the constitution.....There has been issues ever since he appointed Sandile from the beginning.....Hell, Every Zuma appointment is suspicious....
Report Abuse

Aug 18, 2011

Oshmax

Interesting. The president and his government have sworn to uphold the constitution. Then when they try to subvert it ,wittingly or unwittingly , and another institution drwas attention to that , they criticise it. They should be welcoming it.
All GM has achieved is to remind us that his government does not wish to uphold our constitution, that they would be more comfortable without it and rue by decree, as in any other non democratic despotic regime.
Report Abuse

Read all 60 comments