The Constitutional Court on Thursday heard two appeals by state officials who were imprisoned for contempt of court.
These officials were declared to be in contempt of court for failing to comply with court orders and sentenced to prison sentences‚ which were wholly suspended on condition they comply fully with the court orders.
Courts face a major challenge by of non-compliance with judgments against the state and other public bodies.
Although money judgments cannot be enforced against the state through contempt of court proceedings‚ courts are not powerless to ensure compliance with court orders.
They can call functionaries to advance reasons why they should not be held in contempt of court.
In one case Mothusi Lepheana‚ a city manager for the Matjhabeng Local Municipality‚ was convicted of contempt of court by the high court in Bloemfontein in 2014 for failing to comply with two court orders.
These orders had directed the municipality to pay some money it owed to Eskom‚ which stood at over R335 million in July 2014.
These orders had also directed that if the municipality failed to pay Eskom on the agreed time‚ Lepheana should report to the court and give reasons for the default. He did not.
In the second case‚ former Compensation Commissioner Shadrack Mkhonto was found to have been in contempt of court because he failed to comply with a court order requiring him to pay a compensation claim.
Both men appealed against the sentences.
The Constitutional Court consolidated the applications and asked for parties to answer two questions.
The first was whether an official in the position of Lepheana could be held to be in contempt without being formally joined in the legal proceedings.
Another question was whether a correct procedure was adopted in the conviction of Lepheana.
The municipality’s counsel William Mokhari SC said the high court should have joined Lepheana officially in the contempt proceedings.
Mokhari said the orders Lepheane was accused of being in contempt of were orders directed at the municipality.
Mokhari said no case was made out by Eskom to hold Lepheana in contempt of court.
Mokhari said in the judgment where Lepheana was found to be in contempt of court‚ he was not forewarned that the focus of the case was on his failure to comply with court orders.
However‚ Modise Khoza SC‚ for Eskom‚ said Lepheana was involved in the drafting of the two settlement orders.
He said a settlement order dated August 6 2014‚ Lepheane was directed to report to the court if the municipality failed to honour its payment commitment to Eskom.
“He [Lepheana] failed to honour his obligation. That is why he was called to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court‚” Khoza said.
The court reserved judgment. — TMG Digital
Two state officials appeal jail terms for contempt of court
The Constitutional Court on Thursday heard two appeals by state officials who were imprisoned for contempt of court.
These officials were declared to be in contempt of court for failing to comply with court orders and sentenced to prison sentences‚ which were wholly suspended on condition they comply fully with the court orders.
Courts face a major challenge by of non-compliance with judgments against the state and other public bodies.
Although money judgments cannot be enforced against the state through contempt of court proceedings‚ courts are not powerless to ensure compliance with court orders.
They can call functionaries to advance reasons why they should not be held in contempt of court.
In one case Mothusi Lepheana‚ a city manager for the Matjhabeng Local Municipality‚ was convicted of contempt of court by the high court in Bloemfontein in 2014 for failing to comply with two court orders.
These orders had directed the municipality to pay some money it owed to Eskom‚ which stood at over R335 million in July 2014.
These orders had also directed that if the municipality failed to pay Eskom on the agreed time‚ Lepheana should report to the court and give reasons for the default. He did not.
In the second case‚ former Compensation Commissioner Shadrack Mkhonto was found to have been in contempt of court because he failed to comply with a court order requiring him to pay a compensation claim.
Both men appealed against the sentences.
The Constitutional Court consolidated the applications and asked for parties to answer two questions.
The first was whether an official in the position of Lepheana could be held to be in contempt without being formally joined in the legal proceedings.
Another question was whether a correct procedure was adopted in the conviction of Lepheana.
The municipality’s counsel William Mokhari SC said the high court should have joined Lepheana officially in the contempt proceedings.
Mokhari said the orders Lepheane was accused of being in contempt of were orders directed at the municipality.
Mokhari said no case was made out by Eskom to hold Lepheana in contempt of court.
Mokhari said in the judgment where Lepheana was found to be in contempt of court‚ he was not forewarned that the focus of the case was on his failure to comply with court orders.
However‚ Modise Khoza SC‚ for Eskom‚ said Lepheana was involved in the drafting of the two settlement orders.
He said a settlement order dated August 6 2014‚ Lepheane was directed to report to the court if the municipality failed to honour its payment commitment to Eskom.
“He [Lepheana] failed to honour his obligation. That is why he was called to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court‚” Khoza said.
The court reserved judgment. — TMG Digital
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